Delivery of first F10 M5 with M Carbon Ceramic Brakes (with full tech training info)

[Scrippy]

Nice of BMW to lag on this. I've had these brakes in my 335 for 2 years already! I hate brake dust, so these rock!

[135Pats]

F10s look so proper in AW, great choice OP.

[Jonjt]

Originally Posted by M3takesNYC

It is a huge misconception that ceramic brakes perform "better" in terms of stopping distance etc. There is no difference as stopping distance is determined from the mass of the car and its momentum providing the brakes are adequate enough to lock the wheels (then ABS kicks in). The benefit as stated is they do not over heat.

So the reason a porsche does not need ceramics is because it is quite light for one and therefore braking on the tradck puts much less heat and stress into the brakes than a 4500 pound car.

If you are someone that is going to do any track time I think this is a great deal. Avoids you from having to spend money on an aftermarket BBK and will perform better. Also never having to replace rotors is a big perk.

The m5 is the perfect car for ceramic brakes because it is so big that any steel brakes undergo such stress and heat from bringing that mass to a stop that you are really limited with any steel setup if you want to do track. Ceramics are the perfect scenario here for this

I do believe that US law (and probably European law, too) requires all cars to lock the wheels up at highway speed. It's always about traction, always.


Carbon brakes are not necessary for any large car. You "just" need to make sure the steel brakes are properly sized to withstand the temperature and heat cycling. This holds true for any brake design. Carbon brakes tend to be used on race cars more so because you can get away with a smaller brake diameter and caliper size, for a given heat capacity. There are additional benefits too, such as better modulation and lower unsprung weight.

Carbon brakes would be fantastic for such a heavy car, if the car was raced often. Sure, the M in the name stands for motorsports but, M5's don't see the track often, nor are they usually driven hard enough or long enough to really make carbon brakes a necessity. On street cars, carbon brakes are for aesthetics, IMO. Show me an M5 race car that sees 5 hours of track time every weekend, every week during the season, and I'll show you an M5 that needs ceramics.

[mdh]

Originally Posted by Scrippy

Nice of BMW to lag on this. I've had these brakes in my 335 for 2 years already! I hate brake dust, so these rock!

You could pay someone $20 to clean your wheels (and your whole car) every week for 5 years and you'd still have money in your pocket and a better brake system for the street if you went with the steel brakes.

[Jonjt]

Originally Posted by Scrippy

Nice of BMW to lag on this. I've had these brakes in my 335 for 2 years already! I hate brake dust, so these rock!

You put ceramics on a 335i? Serious?

[Karazy]

Thanks for sharing and congrats!

[V-Viper]

Originally Posted by Jonjt

You put ceramics on a 335i? Serious?

Ditto. Did they cost half as much as the car?

[Boss330]

To quote Porsche on the key benefits of CCB:

The key advantage of PCCB is a total weight saving of approximately 50 percent compared with equivalent cast-iron discs. As well as enhancing performance and fuel economy, the unsprung and rotating masses are lightened. The results: greater comfort and road-holding on uneven road surfaces plus better handling and agility.

CCB is an option on ALL Porsche Cayenne models. Another prime example of a car that does CCB brakes justice. Heavy car that generates a lot of heat under braking. A lightweight car does not "need" the CCB brakes in the same way that a heavy car does. And, remember that in Germany you tend to do a LOT of braking when driving on the Autobahn (if you want to drive at high speeds). My car generates more brake dust on a weekend at the autobahn than I do for several weeks at regular roads.

I'm sure progress is allways met with scepticism and new products often need some time before being accepted. Just like when the smart touch screen products came out. Lot of people did not want that technology and preferred the old school products. Steel brake discs are heavy, heat up, warp and generate fade (they are not all that bad, but just to make a point ). Yes, you can improve braking with even bigger discs. But then again you also increase unsprung weight (the biggest enemy to your suspension and steering)...

The stopping distance is also claimed to be better. Probably because there is better friction and heat resistance. Resulting in a better/quicker response during ABS braking and therefore also shorter stopping distance.

Cost is obviously a very valid argument for not choosing the CCB. But I wouldn't agree that it's a bad choice if you have the money. It's better technology, increases braking performance and decreases stopping distance and not least, they are half the weight. IMHO it's just like choosing between the best and most expensive tires or taking a cheaper brand to save some money.

[Darude]

Just got the car back after the run in service. The car now sounds amazing, more pops and crackles especially when lifting off and changing down from 2nd to 1st. Interestingly the technician confirmed that during the run in service the turbos are not at full boost and after the run in service is deactivated the turbos are at max boost pressure.

Ok, for everyone that has a negative impression of the CCB's... My onboard service says that the discs never need replacing and last the lifetime of the car and the brake pads need changing in 100,000 miles! Now opting for these brakes isn't everyones choice, but for such a heavy and powerful car with the style of cross European driving I do with monthly track sessions these brakes are more than worth it for me. I wonder how many people have ever driven cars with 2nd or 3rd gen CCB?

The 23 kilo weight saving which is importantly unsprung makes a sizeable difference to the handling of the car. For me spending the money on the CCB was a no brainer but spending £3700 on the B&O system made no sense on a drivers car as I rarely use the stereo when driving.

Each to their own thats why we all have differently specced and coloured M5's!

[Darude]

IND - Nate

[Boss330]

Just skip B&O stereo (£3700) and rear entertainment system (£2130) and you are just a few small option deletes away from the CCB. Or save the brake service costs over the lifetime of the car.

Getting a M5 and preferring B&O and rear entertainment over CCB kind of makes me wonder why that person is getting a M vehicle in the first place Just get a 550i or a 7-series Makes the CCB allmost a no-brainer in my book.

But thankfully, we have different priorities and spec differently That's why I don't see the point in being so negative about someone speccing differently than you would have done yourselves? Ok, so you don't want CCB. Good for you and no problem. But why the need to critizise the choice of CCB and ridicule someone for having those brakes?

For the driving the OP describes and for those of us who drives on the autobahn, CCB makes a lot of sense. Maybe they don't in the US?

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by Boss330

To quote Porsche on the key benefits of CCB:



CCB is an option on ALL Porsche Cayenne models. Another prime example of a car that does CCB brakes justice. Heavy car that generates a lot of heat under braking. A lightweight car does not "need" the CCB brakes in the same way that a heavy car does. And, remember that in Germany you tend to do a LOT of braking when driving on the Autobahn (if you want to drive at high speeds). My car generates more brake dust on a weekend at the autobahn than I do for several weeks at regular roads.

I'm sure progress is allways met with scepticism and new products often need some time before being accepted. Just like when the smart touch screen products came out. Lot of people did not want that technology and preferred the old school products. Steel brake discs are heavy, heat up, warp and generate fade (they are not all that bad, but just to make a point ). Yes, you can improve braking with even bigger discs. But then again you also increase unsprung weight (the biggest enemy to your suspension and steering)...

The stopping distance is also claimed to be better. Probably because there is better friction and heat resistance. Resulting in a better/quicker response during ABS braking and therefore also shorter stopping distance.

Cost is obviously a very valid argument for not choosing the CCB. But I wouldn't agree that it's a bad choice if you have the money. It's better technology, increases braking performance and decreases stopping distance and not least, they are half the weight. IMHO it's just like choosing between the best and most expensive tires or taking a cheaper brand to save some money.

+69

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by Darude

Just got the car back after the run in service. The car now sounds amazing, more pops and crackles especially when lifting off and changing down from 2nd to 1st. Interestingly the technician confirmed that during the run in service the turbos are not at full boost and after the run in service is deactivated the turbos are at max boost pressure.

Ok, for everyone that has a negative impression of the CCB's... My onboard service says that the discs never need replacing and last the lifetime of the car and the brake pads need changing in 100,000 miles! Now opting for these brakes isn't everyones choice, but for such a heavy and powerful car with the style of cross European driving I do with monthly track sessions these brakes are more than worth it for me. I wonder how many people have ever driven cars with 2nd or 3rd gen CCB?

The 23 kilo weight saving which is importantly unsprung makes a sizeable difference to the handling of the car. For me spending the money on the CCB was a no brainer but spending £3700 on the B&O system made no sense on a drivers car as I rarely use the stereo when driving.

Each to their own thats why we all have differently specced and coloured M5's!

Dang! Never have to change the rotors and pad replacement every 100,000 miles now that sounds like a good investment of $9,200 USD! I would definitely get them now knowing this!

[Karazy]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Just skip B&O stereo (3700) and rear entertainment system (2130) and you are just a few small option deletes away from the CCB. Or save the brake service costs over the lifetime of the car.

Getting a M5 and preferring B&O and rear entertainment over CCB kind of makes me wonder why that person is getting a M vehicle in the first place Just get a 550i or a 7-series Makes the CCB allmost a no-brainer in my book.

But thankfully, we have different priorities and spec differently That's why I don't see the point in being so negative about someone speccing differently than you would have done yourselves? Ok, so you don't want CCB. Good for you and no problem. But why the need to critizise the choice of CCB and ridicule someone for having those brakes?

For the driving the OP describes and for those of us who drives on the autobahn, CCB makes a lot of sense. Maybe they don't in the US?

Plus one. Nice to read an intelligent comment every now and then.

[Karazy]

Originally Posted by Boss330

To quote Porsche on the key benefits of CCB:

CCB is an option on ALL Porsche Cayenne models. Another prime example of a car that does CCB brakes justice. Heavy car that generates a lot of heat under braking. A lightweight car does not "need" the CCB brakes in the same way that a heavy car does. And, remember that in Germany you tend to do a LOT of braking when driving on the Autobahn (if you want to drive at high speeds). My car generates more brake dust on a weekend at the autobahn than I do for several weeks at regular roads.

I'm sure progress is allways met with scepticism and new products often need some time before being accepted. Just like when the smart touch screen products came out. Lot of people did not want that technology and preferred the old school products. Steel brake discs are heavy, heat up, warp and generate fade (they are not all that bad, but just to make a point ). Yes, you can improve braking with even bigger discs. But then again you also increase unsprung weight (the biggest enemy to your suspension and steering)...

The stopping distance is also claimed to be better. Probably because there is better friction and heat resistance. Resulting in a better/quicker response during ABS braking and therefore also shorter stopping distance.

Cost is obviously a very valid argument for not choosing the CCB. But I wouldn't agree that it's a bad choice if you have the money. It's better technology, increases braking performance and decreases stopping distance and not least, they are half the weight. IMHO it's just like choosing between the best and most expensive tires or taking a cheaper brand to save some money.

Bravo on the wise words.

[Karazy]

Originally Posted by Scrippy

Nice of BMW to lag on this. I've had these brakes in my 335 for 2 years already! I hate brake dust, so these rock!

Very cool. Did you notice a big difference in steering response after your swap? Unsprung weight is a biggie as a motorcyclist.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Boss330

To quote Porsche on the key benefits of CCB:



CCB is an option on ALL Porsche Cayenne models. Another prime example of a car that does CCB brakes justice. Heavy car that generates a lot of heat under braking. A lightweight car does not "need" the CCB brakes in the same way that a heavy car does. And, remember that in Germany you tend to do a LOT of braking when driving on the Autobahn (if you want to drive at high speeds). My car generates more brake dust on a weekend at the autobahn than I do for several weeks at regular roads.

I'm sure progress is allways met with scepticism and new products often need some time before being accepted. Just like when the smart touch screen products came out. Lot of people did not want that technology and preferred the old school products. Steel brake discs are heavy, heat up, warp and generate fade (they are not all that bad, but just to make a point ). Yes, you can improve braking with even bigger discs. But then again you also increase unsprung weight (the biggest enemy to your suspension and steering)...

The stopping distance is also claimed to be better. Probably because there is better friction and heat resistance. Resulting in a better/quicker response during ABS braking and therefore also shorter stopping distance.

Cost is obviously a very valid argument for not choosing the CCB. But I wouldn't agree that it's a bad choice if you have the money. It's better technology, increases braking performance and decreases stopping distance and not least, they are half the weight. IMHO it's just like choosing between the best and most expensive tires or taking a cheaper brand to save some money.

[crooked I]

go big or go home! I'll be ordering CCB when I get my m5

[Mr. Liu]

Total off topic but - are you actually Darude? Mr. Sandstorm?

[gvega702]

Originally Posted by mdh

You could pay someone $20 to clean your wheels (and your whole car) every week for 5 years and you'd still have money in your pocket and a better brake system for the street if you went with the steel brakes.

Best thing I've heard all day!

[uhn2000]

Excellent pics and writeup. Thanks for sharing - love the interior!

[d_dot]

dope color combo