Are Carbon Brakes Worth It? | Fifth Gear
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ค. 2024
- Jimmy is looking at carbon brakes, are they really that much better than standard and worth the extra cost?
#FifthGear #CarbonBrakes
For more fantastic car reviews, shoot-outs and all your favourite Fifth Gear moments, subscribe to our Official Channel: goo.gl/IPXAgl
Check out our website for the latest car videos and news from around the web: fifthgear.tv/ - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
![อยู่ได้แล้ว - LIPTA feat. Mirrr [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-9-hpntNym4/mqdefault.jpg)
![มองหน้ากันไม่ติด (Awkward) - โอ๊ต ปราโมทย์ FEAT. MAIYARAP [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4b02SY_r6Gw/mqdefault.jpg)
A lot of people are interested in going fast, very few are interested in stopping fast.
Oh they do stop fast. It's just call the tree braking technique. Better than trail braking. 😁
Brakes are overrated
Wise words!
There is a misrepresentation between dissipation or conduction of heat in your demonstation. When it is actually more about absorption of heat and its relation to friction.
I was hoping someone would find that explanation there and not relevant
I love how he, at the beginning, said our "engieering" marvel.
Personally, I’m attracted to the idea of no brake dust and saving an hour on rim detailing on a Sunday. It would be on a weekend driver so the insides of my rims are always cleaned and polished as well. Also, if steel pads get a little wet they have that nasty rust film build around where the pads don’t rub that needs cleaned off a few times a year to keep a nice fresh look. I don’t believe the CC’s would have this issue either. With a few thousand miles a year I would have to believe I wouldn’t be replacing rotors over the lifetime of owning the car
not scientific in the least: you tested different diameter brakes...in fact, you tests the "base" brakes Vs. Ceramics. You could have at least used the "S" model brakes to be quasi-scientific....
He said testes! Oh bollocks, did he?! Well if you're going balls to the wall all the time it looks like they're worth it.
@@3ducs haha! I'm a doctor by trade, but focus a little higher up on the body! That being said, I've run a Viper ACR with carbons in race series, as well as one with irons. About 15 laps in, they both have their quirks. The irons do have a "curve" they settle into that involves some fade. The carbons also do odd things, and you have to be ready for their non-linear behavior. They can fade out completely, but if you pump the brake once, they come back even stronger. You just have to hope that it does not happen on a lap where you are trying to set up a pass in the braking zone.
That's not very relevant. He demonstrade that brake fade on the ceramics is minimum whereas it's big on the steels.
@@flavioc5389 you are incorrect Sir. "Heat dissipation" is the largest factor in "brake fade", followed secondly by gas formation at the friction surface. Using the smallest Porsche brakes Vs. a ceramic set up is not the closest comparison, just as comparing a Base Cayman would be to a GT3. If you wish to do more research, (and don't care to research SAE whitepapers) look at Car and driver's "test "sheets. All of the porsche "S" level Iron brakes actually produce shorter stopping distances over 5 consecutive stops from 70mph, as they achieve proper working temps. They are designed that way via the brake pad formulation. The standard "non-S" brakes are entirely for street use and will have a thermal curve biased towards the "first stop".
Agreed, however isn't another advantage of Carbon Ceramic brakes that they reduce unsprung mass compared with steel rotors? Which should help in the handling department. Did you experience any differences in that? Just curious.
Problem with carbon ceramic brakes is on the road you don’t use them enough to stop them from glazing. And they don’t work in the cold very well.
Modern carbons don't glaze.
I was going to crash with 458 once after i left home and never driven for 4 days... wasnt stopping at all!
newer one got better and it last very long time.... non carbon also but it don't mean it going stop well since there are many reason why.... overall if you can pay for them... nothing wrong having them... it should first priority for the option list..
Now you can get coated ceramic braking from Porsche so far owners saying its very good and they dont think they need carbon ceramics! Its pretty big also
My experience with Brembo carbons fitted to the several SVR Ftypes I’ve owned is that they work far better from cold than they did in the past. Now a little bit of heat gives you the confidence to use them in anger. The more heat the better they become. On a track you just can’t believe how they keep braking with such performance.
Great video! I was looking for a real world comparison with the PCCB and the Steel Brakes and it doesn’t get any better than that! Thanks! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
The other interesting thing about Concorde was that she had in-hub brake fans for forced cooling. The air into the back and then blown out the hub centres, you can see at 1:51. Often on cold days, flight engineers would stand next to the wheel hub to receive a nice blast of warm air from the brakes after landing.
On a track, huge difference. On your regular commute, no difference at all. Just bragging rights.
They stop the car sooner (look at the first brake test), which makes the car safer.
Less rotating inertia means less energy wasted which equals to higher acceleration and lower fuel consumption. Ceramic brakes are expensive but they are awesome.
Looks like you're just a tight arse who doesnt listen to logic.
BTW, this comparison is only valid once ceramics are upto their operating temperature window. How unsurprising he chose to leave that fact out. If they were stone cold, they would be the same or slightly worse
@@LawrenceAbramoff The beginning of the video does say - our "engieering" marvel.
edmaluf; BS on my DD Macan T, lovely feel, no brake dust ... cleaner and 100k mile warranty..... beat that. Bought the car second hand, didn’t want the bling. I am converted... own a set then comment.
A friend let me drive his Porsche GT3 some years back, equipped with carbon ceramic brakes. Magic. Performance is about changing momentum. Carbon ceramic brakes will allow you to go much further into a corner before you brake. I want them.
My 2015 991.1 GTS came with PCCBs when I bought it "used" in 2018. Back then, I wasn't going to get picky as to what brakes it had simply because where else was I going to find a 3-year old normally aspirated GTS with only 157 kilometers on it. The PCCBs do not squeal and no brake dust. Some clown in our local PCA club didn't see the point to PCCBs, but he drives a Porsche on public roads...one could say what is the point to that? LOL
Drove a Ferrari 488 for a weekend, the Carb brakes squeak like crazy. Go with the steel
the benefits of carbon brakes beyond braking ability are overall weight reduction, which decreases unsprung weight increasing suspension response, reducing rotational weight which benefits acceleration response and increases economy
The best segment Fifth Gear has right now.
Nice comparisonsn and review of the carbon brakes
the video i never knew i needed
ironically even Porsche 911 cup cars use STEEL brakes. simply because they cost a lot less to replace, and you will be replacing them a lot if you are racing. In the real world, steel brakes have better feel in every day use.
Sayem AK cuz supercars are more for show and tell bragging rights
I don't think CCs are allowed in cup racing.
Steel is fine if the rims allow for them to be big enough to handle the heat.
The big difference on the street is going to be the brake dust generation. CC brakes produce nearly no dust, stock Porsche pads for the steel brakes need constant cleaning.
First, the conductivity of steel brake discs is actually a good thing, not a minus. It helps spread the energy generated away from the swept area. Second, that long pedal can also be caused by overheated brake fluid that doesn't have a high enough boiling point for the use you're putting your car to. When Porsche first came out with CCBs 20-odd years ago they were a bit rubbish, very expensive, with poor cold performance and a short life. Cracking discs were not unknown after one track day. Nowadays carbon ceramics are generally very good and half the price in real terms. Even with a few track days the discs can last 150k miles. They are good even when cold and the only downside is they get a bit squeaky if not used enough. The major day-to-day advantage though is that they emit vitually no brake dust.
I strongly believe that Jimmy's experiment is relevant if we look at the type of cars with this optional extra they're clearly not pruis class but fast and unpractilly expensive cars and another thing I've deduced from this is cars off the same weight, same speed should always perform differently unless we talking about low speeds which in turn brings me to the BMW "victory"over the Merc on the carwow comparison/races.unless of course the Stuttgarts badge carries more weight 🤷🏼♂️
That’s official the most intense mustache I’ve ever seen.
4:03 distance between the first stop and the last was some 15 meters (with steel brakes) … first carbon brake 5 meters longer - but still 100feet shorter?!? how does that add up? 15 - 5 = 10meters... how can one stop 100 feet faster within 10 meters?
Carbon brakes are only worth considering if you do track days regularly. On the road, you will never really notice the difference.
Leonard Marinus some don’t even use them on the track because they’re so expensive to replace. Audi RS3 front carbon ceramic brake rotors alone are $10,000 USD alone. They did have problems with them warping and cracking so they stopped selling them for 2019.
You sir have never driven an M5 in Milton Keynes :)
@@tamtdc No sir I have not
Excellent vid! Would it be fair to call that beard configuration a reverse goatee?
Your forgot the part about steel brakes transferring heat to the brake fluid too,..
rotor material doesn't matter, it's the brake pad material that is connected to your brake fluid
that's why carbon brakes can reach like 800c even though the best brake fluid boils at only 260c
Don't forget cooldown after that episode, particularly with the carbon brakes.
He didn’t even bother to get out of the car to properly place the first cone in the blue 718
Do you still get hot spots when you get heat soak?
To make the best 100% fair, you need 2 identical cayman T's, the white car with the PCCB had Led lights PDK making it heavier so the brakes would of needed to work a tad bit harder to stop the car, so if the miami blue car had pccb, it would stop even sooner than the carrara white car
When using it daily, inthe city.. do the disks make peep noises? That is what I heard.. and that is annoying.
Glad i'd made the right decission to replace my toyota prius disc to carbon ceramic.
Good video.
wonder how you break them in when new ?
I thought that this was an engaging and informative video. Thankyou.
Fifth gear team, can you redo this test again with more accurate scientific method please? Braking start point, measuring tools, measure the weight of the two cars to make sure none have significant advantage, similar tires and similar tires wear, new brake fluid, and semi new brake pads at least … etc. this is the ONLY head to head video test in the world for iron vs. PCCB brakes! So please redo it again as it will be a reference for so many people for so many years ahead! thank you 👏🏼
Agree. They are better in every way. Except for cost.
But, in this case, the number of pistons acting on the break discs are diferent. Is that right? However It would not change the fact that carbon are more efficient.
Great vídeo.
Okay. I understand that braking performance is gonna be increased but what about acceleration and handing? Having carbon brakes must significantly improve those considering the less rotating mass and less un-sprung weight.
In my experience, carbon ceramics are a real pain in the arse, if you're daily driving around towns.
Even the most sedate braking, from low speed, has passengers lurching forward against the seatbelt. Worse still, if you just use them for regular driving, they will glaze over. This then requires one to jump through hoops (with a series of acceleration to 70mph and braking hard, to the point of triggering the ABS) to restore the surface. Otherwise, one will suffer the embarrassment of pedestrians staring at you, in your expensive car, as you squeak your way down every high street and through every car park, with the cries of "You need new brakes mate!" ringing in your ears.
I changed mine to steel, and damn to the lowered car value (since people seem to pay more for cars with CC brakes). With Ferrari and McLaren they come as standard. Otherwise, I'd never have them by choice. I don't thrash any car, so it's just not worth it, from that perspective; and, in my view, nothing but a negative for regular everyday use.
Wilwood, AP Racing, and several other companies are now making Carbon Ceramic Rotors out of long strand carbon fibers and other unique methods that will make the rotors last 30-40% longer than Brembo's CCB's on people who beat on them at the tracks and some can even be resized for a few hundred bucks up to 3 times just like steel brakes. So the technology is progressing and I hope that in 10 years from now you can buy them for half the price that they are now.
I dont know if they watched that or if they said that but cabon brakes need to be on temperatur before expanding their full potential, but i think so do steel brakes
Worth it? I have them on my Macan Turbo. Expensive but I love them; 100k warranty....great feel and no brake dust! And I did not even get to the performance part!!
There should not be a difference between the steel and ceramic in the first run. in more runs it could be different due to heat transfer. The tyres are actually the first limiting factors for brake distance. They said nothing about that or tyres and their status or the weight of the car. Not a properly documented test.
"hear dissipation"?! What is that?!
As told in the video "they are generally the same", so weight and factory fit tires alike. This is not a tire test. But... while you already commenting on "limiting factors" you've forgot to mention, that not just the tires, but tire pressure is also a factor. "Were those the same..." you might ask... :D LOL
@@attilazk I was trying to write heat transfer. :)
I am against to misinformation. If someone makes such a test, they should also spend some effort to make it more comparable. At least that is my expectation from car journalists.
With the pdk on the 718 with pccb's it had an advantage already because of the engine braking from the pdk downshifting.
Manual is probably lighter though
its more like $20'000 for 4 disks plus $800 for the pads !!!
They don’t tell you the downside of Carbon brakes in very cold climates.
Yes they are expensive and it’s not really an issue unless you are doing this on a track. One or 2 hard stops are not going to make much difference. Secondly if you want to stop quickly save your money and take a class or 2 on how to drive a sports car properly. This will cost you far less and will improve your stopping distance far more that CS brakes.
These are for great drivers who track cars not the idiot who drives his 911 to and from work in traffic.
Steve Jovan actually ... people who track tend to run through a lot of brake pads and disks ... this means that they prefer higher quality steel rotors to carbon ceramics ... honestly if you drove from work to house ... you’d probably never change your disks in a very long time ... and if you lease your cars ... you’re better of ticking that option as you’re likely to sell the car before you have to change the brakes ... cheers :)
Kamal Chagla
According to whom? In case you ever actually track a car you will experience brake fade! CS negate brake fade.
Hint some people can afford to enjoy the better quality options rather than worrying about the costs. Remember this is not an activity for none Europeans.
It’s a complex piece of machinery not an elephant!
Steve Jovan I know people with gt3s and m4s that are being tracked regularly in chennai who prefer steel rotors sir . I understand that a lot can afford the carbon ceramics And do use them too ... but I think it’s only people with pistas, SVJs and cars of that level who do it ... but again this I also see is split.... I’m not trying to say they work worse or better on a track but that sometimes if you track a lot ... ceramics become very expensive
@@Kamalchagla you go through alot of consumable on tracks so carbon disc and there pads are lot more expensive then steel and sinter pads so people tend to use high performance steel rotor with paired with argressive sinter pads and some mods like brake duct tend to close the perfromance gap of the carbon ceramics at a much more affordable price
Was unsprung weight mentioned?
On the part with the concord
I just wanna know why he's playing Mario Kart Wii in the thumbnail
Yes
Some how a Porsche Cayman end up in every season of Fifth Gear
5:06 “EXACTLY 100 feet”
Lol. That tape measure tho...
Well done...
Very good test💪
Aren’t standard brake discs cast iron?
amazing
At 4:20 you started braking about 50 meters to early in the white Porsche
Track day enthusiasts still use steels. Steels are cheaper, allowing you to do more laps. Every responsible track instructor will tell you to stop often and avoiding doing too many laps in a raw, allowing your brakes to cool down anyways. Steels offer better feel as well. Most racing series still use steels.
Carbon ceramics are relevant on heavy cars that destroy their brakes very quickly (big SUVs, estate cars).
Just buy light cars and steels...
If carbon brakes are a £5k option why was I quoted £5k a corner for replacement rotors and pads on a Pan GTS ?
Something not right with the figures here. The steel brakes faded resulting in a 15 metre longer braking zone by the end. Then he said the carbons stopped 5 metres faster than the best steel result and therefore 20 metres or 65 feet better than the worst steel result. But at the end they were 100 feet better?
Carbon fiber can actually conduct heat much better than steel. In fact some grades of carbon fiber conduct heat much better than copper. Low thermal conductivity would be a disadvantage in brakes. The main advantage of carbon fiber brakes is less weight and wear.
his beard looks like brake pads
I find this presenter rather irritating and in my opinion he has added nothing to 5th Gear. However, this was the best simple explanation and demonstration of the difference between the two brake compounds I've seen. Well done.
It was a rather poor interpretation. Good heat dissipation and conductance is actually something you want with friction brakes, and steel rotors are better at this than carbon ceramic ones. But Carbon ceramic rotors can sustain much higher temperatures without deformation, and that (+weight) is why they are better for race cars. But way more demanding for maintenance, a lot more expensive and don't really work well when cold (that's why you can see so many exotic cars trashed in parking lots). A good rest of steel rotors will do the job of a road car much better for quite a few emergency stops in a row, but I doubt you need a few hours of heavy braking on public roads no matter how heavy or powerful your car is. Airplane brakes are designed to be light and heat resistant, quite a different application, even big trucks use steel brakes and are cable of stopping faster when fully loaded, due to better tire grip...
@@anzew88 If you feel the visual display of stopping power was falsified, I would complain if I were you ;)
@@resnonverba137 well I can't say that. The stopping DISTANCE is greatly impacted by the tire size/compound (basically grip), weight of the car, shock absorbers (and other undercarriage settings) and also the programming of ABS, EBA, ESP and similar...
Yea, they were both Caymans, but was the weight the same? was the tires the same?
All I wanted to point out, same size discs, with same brake pads area and pressure would on their own be comparable in braking power no matter if they are steel or carbon/ceramic or any other material. The advantages of later being more durability under continious heavy use. For one heavy breaking per hour (or every 15 mins) from highway speed to 0 (which is more than you need on actual commute), the steel breaks are probably the better choice, since they preform best when cold and start to fade as he explained when they get hot, but are designed to stop the car a few times before they start to fade. Race track driving is something completely different, you use heavy breaking before each corner, the ESP and torque vectoring are usually using differential braking to achieve better results around the corner and all this is building heat in the discs and pads, thus needing more heat resistant materials like carbon/ceramic… these also perform better when heated up, so not so good for everyday driving in the rain. Some performance road cars (Porsche, AMGs, Ms,... not exclusively on carbon/ceramic discs) have a programming installed, which in when driving fast (highway speeds and above) periodically gently apply breaks just to dry them off and put some heat in them, just to make them ready immediately when needed. You probably noticed on every car with disc brakes driving in really heavy rain for a longer time without using brakes, when you press on the pedal it takes a second or 2 for the brakes to start actually breaking, because they were wet, the affect you have on cold (dry) carbon discs, but at higher speeds it's a lot bigger safety issue. Ever seen a warning at the end of the automatic car wash? "Check breaks before driving off!" … same reason! So next time you drive in heavy rain, keep in mind you need an extra second to to start braking.
@@resnonverba137 What I'd take away from this video... The carbon/ceramic brakes can stop you 10 times in row with almost no diference… Steel ones fade after they are hot, so you have 2 good stops, before you need to cool them for efficiency on next braking. Do you really need more then 2 consecutive stops from 80-0 in everyday driving? The difference between the 2 cars, could be because of the size of the brakes (steel ones look smaller even on video), tires, weight of the car and so on...
That beard LOL
But how carbon brake disc make?
By hand
Carbons do fade, but takes a lot to make them fade.... other benefit of carbon brakes - no brake dust - wheels are always clean :) Not to mention 100k miles before needing to change them so offset that money not spent on replacement metal discs and pads and makes carbons less expensive by a 1K or so.
I might go buy a porsche car right now
"...it's all come down to brake fade...". Sorry, but what about the big advantage in less rotating inertia??
how are they on a daily driver ?
Last forever if not tracked, less squeaks and less dust..
If they break they cost arround 6k euros to replace. You dont daily something like that
26,000km so far. No dust, braking is fantastic. But on wet, cold day first tap on brake on higher speed feels weird, like there is no brake at all ;)
I feel like the tires were the main bottle neck of the carbon ceramics.
The bad heat transfer of carbon brakes is actually not a positive, because the transfer from the surface to the middle cooling fins is going to be worse.
He forgot to mention that the heat generated in steel brakes transfers more easily to the callipers, which I turn heats the oil to boiling point. These bubbles make the pedal spongy and reduces the braking force. Brake fluid is hydroscopic, meaning it absorbs water over time. The older the oil the more chance the water will boil. I have carbon brakes on my SVR FType, they get better as they get hotter if used on a track, never fade and no sponginess under foot. Cost? New set of replacement pads front only c£1400 fitted pads on their own c£1250. I understand that Carbon brakes are hand made, hence the cost.
anyone comment on Surface Transforms carbon ceramics
Nice video. Definitely a lot of advantages on the track but average won't spend the money or see any benefits.
Ploughed through 3 hgv's in a porsche. Hahaha.
those feet and miles and stones and inch..can you give that in metres?
Divide feet by 3.1 for meters, rough Calc. Or multiply Mx39.37/12 for a more accurate meters to feet conversion. Oh how lovely to be old.
@@andrewcampbell9116 thank you,i am old too..
See wolverine is doing interviews now
Iron, not steel
I’m not sure I believe that this test was honest. If both steel and carbon brakes can activate abs, and the tires are the same, then there wouldn’t be any difference on the first run. You are limited by the traction of the tire, not the power of the brakes.
Wow. I had no idea they are making carbon disc brakes now. I only knew about ceramic ones.
They are the same. Carbon ceramic brakes.
As an aviation buff already knew that concorde was the first to use carbon brakes.
this result is extremely misleading... should have compared the PCCB equipped cayman with a GT4 that has similar disc size to the PCCB, therefore has better heat dissipation. Stock cayman brakes had no chance against PCCB.... it's like comparing brakes on a naked bike to a superbike...
Why is this video sponsored by Peugeot?
With the Carbon Brakes you've avoided the "3 HGV's" in front of you, but because you stopped so quickly the 3 behind you have struck your rear end.
Are carbon brakes worth it? Yes! Many entry level sports cars and even dedicated sports cars cannot really do more than 2-3 laps on a track before the brake fade puts you in pit lane for cool down.
That "carbon donsn't transfer heat as well" part is entirely nonexsensical.
Its an epoxied carbon fiber tube. Carbon CERAMIC BRAKES are an entirely different thing with completely different material properties. this carbon fiber tube doesnt conduct heat very well casue its not a uniform material.
YOU WANT a good heat conducter to soak the entire disk with the heat energy from the braking. a bad heat conductor would mean only the surface gets incredibly hot, leading to insane fade while not being able to transfer the heat to the fins and give it off to the air. the amount of heat put into both sytems is the same. a good brake rotors job is to take in that heat and diperse it as fast as possible while being able to maintain material properties under high temperature. AND THATS THE POINT OF CARBON CERAMICS
1. They can endure much higher temperatures without fading. Steel gets soft when its hot, carbon doesnt. Which also leads to
2. Less wear. Cabron ceramic in this case is far harder than steel. They can outlast steel brakes by 5 times easily.
3. They weigh far less than similar sized steel brakes. and as this is rotating unsprung mass, the weight difference alone can significatly imprrove performance all around.
Poor research at its best... first of all sportscar/hypercar carbon brakes are carbon-ceramic which is C/SiC composite, whereas airplanes and top class motorsports use Carbon-Carbon composite C/C - two different worlds...
2:40 is a simple carbon/epoxy tube where again, the epoxy is a completely different matrix compared to two materials mentioned above. C/Epoxy is not used as brake rotor material!!!
C/SiC and C/C have excellent heat conduction compared to C/epoxy
This is very biased outcome. The resul of this test assumes that steel brakes are unable to trigger ABS threshold when hot, which definately is not be case for Porche Cayman in 10 stop cycle.
you have no idea wtf you are talking about do you????????? lols
We all know the carbon stops better but what about the handling?
What happened to the beard?
I'll stick with my endless brake pads and any decent set of slotted rotors that's good enough , 5k is a bit nuts.
too expensive and useless for road, and too expensive for trackdays
Too expensive for you , cus if the guy can afford a Porsche then he can easily afford some metal discs 🤣
@@nottherealRohaNNNN if you track it seriously you're pushing $20k for brakes and rotors at least once a season or potentially twice. That adds up fast on a $100k car.
I opted for PCCB on my new 992... looks good, check it out: th-cam.com/video/OEvMc-K8XHY/w-d-xo.html
I recently splurged and rented a Porsche 911 Carrera S in LA to drive some of the incredible roads of Malibu and Angeles Crest Highway. The car had steel brakes, and I could not detect any fade at all, despite some extremely aggressive driving. Granted, I only had the car for a few days, but I didn't ever feel like I needed the ceramics.
If carbon ceramics do t suffer from fade, why are the rotors and calipers always so massive compared to the base steel kits? Seems unnecessary
Why is the wolverine working on cars ?
No, not on my van anyway 😀
Something isn't right with this test. The iron discs and carbon discs should stop in almost exactly the same distance within a couple meters on the first attempts because the limiting factor isn't the brakes, but the friction afforded by the tires. Once the brakes get hot from multiple stops in quick succession, then the carbons should begin to take the edge over the irons.
Manual vs pdk.
Manual is more fun if you prefer it, otherwise pdk is better in almost every way
Top Gear made that test many years ago on tv. And they were not even the first ti do that
No. My Corvette is tyre limited not brake limited. For the rest there are cooling ducts. Not worth spending €8000. What about #brake pistons, tyre type, brake fluid, brake pad type, brake diameter ... its a huge wallet piss take
Also totally unfair to compare the carbon ceramic discs with the steel discs and regular brake pads. If you use your car on the track you would use performance brake pads - the steel discs would work a lot better with those, the brake fade is in the pads first!!