[Track/S]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Not that I want to disagree with you, but I have heard from several experts that this is not correct. What you're talking about that's harder than steel is the friction surface, which is only .01mm thick. The rest of the CC rotor is the core, which is quite weak compared to iron. Iron has a density of 7.3g/cm³ and carbon has a density of 2.3g/cm³, so it's necessary that the clamping force be changed.

As far as every reason for the booster, I can't say, but I do know that the carbon ceramic pads are less sensitive than the stock 2NH pads, even when hot, so I'm not sure how a weaker booster would correct anything. I also know that if you don't change the booster you get a softer pedal, not a harder one.

i have tried to machine the edge of the disc on CNC with diamond tool, the tool wore down and the edge was intact, with same tool I can cut a steel disc in half.

I have 2 cars, F82 with a factory ccb and F87 with 2NH to which I changed only the discs, the pedal in F87 is much harder than on F82.

Saturday I did a 200km trip with the f82 and Sunday 600km with the f87, the diference is huge

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Track/S

i have tried to machine the edge of the disc on CNC with diamond tool, the tool wore down and the edge was intact, with same tool I can cut a steel disc in half.

Again, I don't want to argue with you, but something must be wrong with your tool. The carbon core of the CC rotors is so weak that even tapping one of your wheels against the surface destroys the area, as some have unfortunately found out.

Originally Posted by Track/S

I have 2 cars, F82 with a factory ccb and F87 with 2NH to which I changed only the discs, the pedal in F87 is much harder than on F82.

This is probably down to the coding, but could be separate issues with your F82. Why not swap the booster in the F87 and get it coded? BMW saw fit to do this, and they have their reasons. A firm pedal isn't everything. These are very expensive systems, and you seem very happy to FAAFO, which seems weird to me, but to each their own.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Again, I don't want to argue with you, but something must be wrong with your tool. The carbon core of the CC rotors is so weak that even tapping one of your wheels against the surface destroys the area, as some have unfortunately found out.



This is probably down to the coding, but could be separate issues with your F82. Why not swap the booster in the F87 and get it coded? BMW saw fit to do this, and they have their reasons. A firm pedal isn't everything. These are very expensive systems, and you seem very happy to FAAFO, which seems weird to me, but to each their own.

I'm not arguing with you, I'm just telling you that I don't see the need to change the booster, I really like the feel of the pedal with the oem booster, I still think that in the CCB version the booster was changed only to reduce sensitivity to the pedal and make it the closest thing to steel.

Booster function cannot be corrected with coding.

And no, there is nothing wrong with the tools, the CCB is harder than steel but more brittle.

[reginijr]

Guys I have the CCB’s on my M2cs I swapped to them from steel.
For one I HAD to change the booster the pedal sensitivity was so
Abrupt it was annoying. And yes I coded with the euro coding before
Hand and that didn’t affect booster operation. If you do true CCB’s
HIGHLY RECCOMENDED you do the booster.

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Track/S

I'm not arguing with you, I'm just telling you that I don't see the need to change the booster, I really like the feel of the pedal with the oem booster, I still think that in the CCB version the booster was changed only to reduce sensitivity to the pedal and make it the closest thing to steel.

Booster function cannot be corrected with coding.

And no, there is nothing wrong with the tools, the CCB is harder than steel but more brittle.

Originally Posted by reginijr

Guys I have the CCB’s on my M2cs I swapped to them from steel.
For one I HAD to change the booster the pedal sensitivity was so
Abrupt it was annoying. And yes I coded with the euro coding before
Hand and that didn’t affect booster operation. If you do true CCB’s
HIGHLY RECCOMENDED you do the booster.

Some have done the CCB swap without the booster, some without coding, and still some without either. I feel better knowing I did both since that's what BMW recommends, but it's clear that none of it is truly "required."

[reginijr]

Honestly when it comes to CCB’s and the price you have
To do it the right way IMO. You spent so much to begin
With so do it right. And I don’t know how this is possible
But my service advisor said because it’s a bmw part it’s covered
Under warranty .

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by reginijr

Guys I have the CCB’s on my M2cs I swapped to them from steel.
For one I HAD to change the booster the pedal sensitivity was so
Abrupt it was annoying. And yes I coded with the euro coding before
Hand and that didn’t affect booster operation. If you do true CCB’s
HIGHLY RECCOMENDED you do the booster.

Emergency brake must be diactivated via coding, few people know that...
You had a problem and you did not find the solution, I do.
If you think that I did not install the booster to save money, you are very wrong.

I rode ccb to improve braking, not to show off.

BMW does it and I already said why, the answer is above.

[reginijr]

Bmw doing it as we speak. Booster and coding as per OEM.

[///MPhatic]

Guys, it's all good. We know that BMW recommends all sorts of things that, per our specific use may not need to be done. Some feel better doing it as BMW recommends, others don't.

I just recently spoke with MFM5 about a huge huge chip he has had on one of his CC rotors for 25K miles. BMW would absolutely recommend that the rotor be replaced, but it hasn't gotten worse in 25K miles. This is pretty much the worst case scenario for most, and it has been fine.

So we see clearly in practice that not everything has to be done to BMW's standards, but it's good to know what BMW recommends, and exactly why.

[medphysdave]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Guys, it's all good. We know that BMW recommends all sorts of things that, per our specific use may not need to be done. Some feel better doing it as BMW recommends, others don't.

I just recently spoke with MFM5 about a huge huge chip he has had on one of his CC rotors for 25K miles. BMW would absolutely recommend that the rotor be replaced, but it hasn't gotten worse in 25K miles. This is pretty much the worst case scenario for most, and it has been fine.

So we see clearly in practice that not everything has to be done to BMW's standards, but it's good to know what BMW recommends, and exactly why.

I agree with this logic. Lots of things we discuss and try to determine why, necessary, Overkill, etc. No reason for us to choose this item as the place where BMW got it spot on. Let's talk single use bolts

That's a big chip. Maybe those rotors are a lot more forgiving than we give them credit for being. I was worried about chips like that meaning a replacement was necessary. A big reason why I don't have CCB on my car. If you can nick them up a bit without issue that would seriously ease my mind a bit.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Guys, it's all good. We know that BMW recommends all sorts of things that, per our specific use may not need to be done. Some feel better doing it as BMW recommends, others don't.

I just recently spoke with MFM5 about a huge huge chip he has had on one of his CC rotors for 25K miles. BMW would absolutely recommend that the rotor be replaced, but it hasn't gotten worse in 25K miles. This is pretty much the worst case scenario for most, and it has been fine.

So we see clearly in practice that not everything has to be done to BMW's standards, but it's good to know what BMW recommends, and exactly why.

I have exactly same damage on one of my discs, I did not replace it nor do I plan to do it until I reach the minimum weight.
39.000km

[medphysdave]

As a point of reference. If I ever swap to CCB. It'll be pads, rotors, and coding. I won't swap the booster.

[reginijr]

Nobody’s showing off where did that come from?
Somebody shit in your corn flakes? Chill buddy where
Talking about brakes not politics

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Track/S

I have exactly same damage on one of my discs, I did not replace it nor do I plan to do it until I reach the minimum weight.
39.000km

I think it would be beneficial to the thread if you'd post a picture when you get a moment. The cost of replacement for a carbon ceramic rotor scares the hell out of just about everyone, and anything that can ease that fear is good IMO.

I know BMW has their replacement values, but if it's in the middle of the disc it seems to be totally fine, just ugly.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

I think it would be beneficial to the thread if you'd post a picture when you get a moment. The cost of replacement for a carbon ceramic rotor scares the hell out of just about everyone, and anything that can ease that fear is good IMO.

I know BMW has their replacement values, but if it's in the middle of the disc it seems to be totally fine, just ugly.

Also bought a set of ccb front brakes of m5 f10 at a good price to have as a spare:

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Track/S

Also bought a set of ccb front brakes of m5 f10 at a good price to have as a spare:

Smart!

I wonder what the difference is in the hat. I know it's shaped a little different, but I have wondered if it sits any different, or if there is a reason for the hat to be shaped that way.

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Smart!

I wonder what the difference is in the hat. I know it's shaped a little different, but I have wondered if it sits any different, or if there is a reason for the hat to be shaped that way.

I have no idea why they did it differently, I just know that to mount them on F87 you have to enlarge the center, and the pads are wider, the braking has to be awesome with those pads, i will try them soon

[medphysdave]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

Smart!

I wonder what the difference is in the hat. I know it's shaped a little different, but I have wondered if it sits any different, or if there is a reason for the hat to be shaped that way.

Good question. I almost bought a set of CCB discs locally, but noticed that hats were not a modern design. BMW is known to change some things without mentioning it. Same goes for CCB manufacturing. I think it is always better to get the newest CCB disc possible.

[medphysdave]

Possibly an M4 CCB vs the M5 CCB. I think the M5 is the one that is a direct fit for the F87 with the 2NH brakes

[Track/S]

Originally Posted by medphysdave

Possibly an M4 CCB vs the M5 CCB. I think the M5 is the one that is a direct fit for the F87 with the 2NH brakes

They are not direct fit, the center has to be enlarged, look at the picture above.

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by medphysdave

Possibly an M4 CCB vs the M5 CCB. I think the M5 is the one that is a direct fit for the F87 with the 2NH brakes

Yeah, they were introduced on the M6, and are different. The pad material should be the same, as I believe Brembo hasn't change that. Someone at Brembo could tell us for sure.

[medphysdave]

That's good to know that none of them are direct fit. I thought you could buy used discs and put them on the 2NH hub.