Do I really need ceramics?

[S4WON]

If it helps my B8 S4 was 650 quid fully comp, no excess for year 5 on the audi warranty scheme (mondial)

[HYFR]

Extended warranties have changed in the last 6 months.

they are now done in house by VWFS, no longer outsourced to Mondial (although the Mondial option is still available, being phased out). Typically the VWFS variant is cheaper.

The warranties bought at point of order is different to an extended warranty. One is backed by Factory money, the other is an insurance product by VWFS

[Shinobi675]

I love the ceramics argument like brakes that have the ability to lock up the fronts can be beaten for stopping distances. Are the ceramic brakes changing the maximum grip levels of the tyres somehow!

But... Evo (I think!) have done this test with two identical f-types, about a year ago. One steal, one ceramics. 19 full stop starts back to back later from 130 i think. Only then did it show brake fade.

But... Handling and feel wise, the ceramics were better due to their lighter mass reducing over all unsprung mass. So racers use them for handling gains more than brake fade they concluded.

[bam_bam]

Which racers?

[Shinobi675]

They used it in a generic "nobody can disprove me" way. I remember reading it and laughing. 2 pages of experiments. Then some waffle based on generics without experiment for a whole page.

The stopping stuff with brake fade was really interesting though.

[Shinobi675]

Looks like it was in Evo Jan 2015

[chunky79]

I would have thought a heavier car would benefit more from ramics than a lighter car after doing 19 stops from 130? I know brakes are designed for most cars but even so.

[anth8910]

It's all irrelevant now as I didn't opt for ceramics. Just couldn't justify the costs. The dealer did have an interesting point that I'm going to throw into the mix though, he said at trade in you'd probably get less due to the replacement value of the discs!
Anyway, I've stuck with steel. Build week and spec to follow soon

[Shinobi675]

I would have thought a heavier car would benefit more from ramics than a lighter car after doing 19 stops from 130? I know brakes are designed for most cars but even so.

Yer I'm sure you're right here. Though the f-type was heavier than I expected!

The ring doesn't hammer the breaks as much as a short circuit. The 996 doesn't brake fade, but I had to change my driving for the rs6 otherwise I had really bad fade about 6km in. So actually you definitely are right as the rs6 is a heavy beast!

[IanH755]

Another thing, the initial performance of steel and ceramic should be identical *only* if they are the same size.

I know with C6's, the ceramic is not only 30mm bigger and 4mm thicker it's also got a greater swept area and more pad contact area (hub to rim) so ceramics on a C6 should be better than steels even on 1st application, which bears out what classba mentioned about his.

[doodlebug]

Yes, same on C7, bigger disks.

[RossDagley]

so ceramics on a C6 should be better than steels even on 1st application

Better how? Can they both not lock the wheels?

On first application ceramics are generally "worse" actually with less bite and a wooden feel. Of course, if you press hard enough, you'll lock the wheels/engage ABS etc. On either steels or ceramics, on first application.

Ceramics advantage comes in with fade resistance but more importantly unsprung mass and moment of inertia improvements. Don't underestimate the last two as fade resistance can be overcome on steels with better pads, but then you lose the road-friendly ability of the stock pads, whilst ceramics just 'do it all out of the box'.

[Graeme4130]

so ceramics on a C6 should be better than steels even on 1st application

Better how? Can they both not lock the wheels?

On first application ceramics are generally "worse" actually with less bite and a wooden feel. Of course, if you press hard enough, you'll lock the wheels/engage ABS etc. On either steels or ceramics, on first application.

Ceramics advantage comes in with fade resistance but more importantly unsprung mass and moment of inertia improvements. Don't underestimate the last two as fade resistance can be overcome on steels with better pads, but then you lose the road-friendly ability of the stock pads, whilst ceramics just 'do it all out of the box'.

I'd disagree on the initial feel as modern ceramics are as good as steels now days
When ceramic brakes first came to the mass market on the early 996 turbos, they were awful, and you literally had to push the pedal to the floor for them to eve remotely work when cold, but modern Audi ceramics work very well when cold
The only time I really notice a longer pedal is if the car's just been washed and the discs are cold, and then it needs a brush of the brakes initially to get them biting

[IanH755]

Ross - Their greater pad area means that they would be able to lock the wheels in a faster time which gives them a slightly higher decelaration force over steels, upto the grip limit of the tyres anyway.

I mean, we're not talking about steels being rubbish, the differences are fairly minor until you repeatedly hammer the brakes.

Of course, I could be talking complete rubbish as I've not driven ceramics but will have a set by Dec so I can do a back-to-back test then.

[Shinobi675]

Yer but that's not ceramics, ap racing disks are lighter and larger than standard but about a third of ceramics.

Interesting on size verses speed to locking the wheels. I can see your logic, on the other hand, does a bigger disk give you a fast lock, or does it give you more feel and reduce steel fade through volume of heat sump?