correct me if im wrong but the 55's come with 8piston/4piston and the 63's come with 6piston/4piston..........wtf????

 

Fewer pistons is not a bad thing

Some feel 8 is over kill in reality. The 6 piston system as larger piston bores and the overal clamping area is virtually the same. The caliper now is lighter and it has a true light weight 2 piece hat and rotor.

You can be sure the E63's brakes are a true step ahead of what the E55 has. Our rotors are stones, and the calipers are bricks as well. The E55 does stop well but if could be a whole lot better for such a high powered car. The system has terminal fade far to quickly and the new 6 piston system as designed to address that.

 

ohhhhh

 

My understanding is that the E63 brakes will be a sizeable (pardon the pun) improvement over those of the E55....

 

The reason why we have 8 pistons on E55 is because we have 4 pads. I don't see how they can split 6 into 4, unless they only put in two huge pads in the E63 and now have 3 pistons on each pad, instead of 4 on two pads.

 

Isn't the new E63 also going to come with ceramic composite rotors similar to Porsche PCCB?

If so, the initial bite and unsprung weight savings will make this a very cool setup. On my GT2, the PCCB feels great!

Then again, I still think it's overkill on a 4-door sedan that will hardly ever (if ever) see a racetrack. I don't understand the point of trying to save so much unsprung weight on a car that doesn't really handle all that well anyway. And how many times are you really going to be pounding on the brakes that would require ceramic technology?

Just my 2 cents.

 

I think the ceramic rotors are part of the 030 package, so I do not think they are stock. A brake job costs about $5K in those. You really think every car would get it?

 

Well, under normal street usage, the lifespan of ceramic rotors is approx. 175,000 miles... at least that's what Porsche claimed on PCCB.

$5K would be a bargain. For PCCB, the rotors used to be $8,000 per corner. Now I believe it's down to $2,000 per rotor, but that's still pretty $$$$

 

After AMG offered ceramic rotors on the CL55 they took a step away
from the whole thing. but I understand the pads are ceramic on the E63!

 

Of course the SLR has "exotic" Ceramic brakes (and an exotic price tag to match if you need new ones that is - I heard around soething ridiculous like $25k???).

Were the CLS models related to these in type/size materials etc? I can't see AMG/MB doing such a huge development as this and not moving the tech to more volume cars to capitalize on the R&D...unless there's a real problem or two with the idea (for now).

Porsche for sure has just about the best braking technology there is (ceramic or not)...and stopping distances to prove it - an area where both AMG and BMW-M could learn from Porsche I think.

 

Well with the ceramic composites moving downward in the Porsche lineup-- it's optional now on Carreras, Boxsters, and Caymans, I think the increased volumes will create lower costs per unit which would make ceramics a great alternative to steel rotors.

One of the things that Porsche GT2/3 owners have experienced is rotors getting destroyed with continuous track use. Some say that it depends on how often you change your pads and your braking style. Others have given up and gone back to steel. The debate over on Rennlist is long and exhausting with no real resolution. They say the Gen.2 rotors are better, but it's too early to tell. One thing is for sure though, if the cost factor on ceramic rotor replacements gets down to say, $1000 per corner, than the cost benefit analysis starts to pencil out nicely. People ***** and moan about these rotors only because they cost so damn much!

In all fairness, yes, Porsche braking technology is superior to AMG or BMW M (the single piston brakes are a joke)... however, realize that you are also talking about much lighter sports cars, and the rear engine bias on the 911's actually helps braking due to the weight transfer characteristics under load versus the really heavy front load that our sedans have. In addition, Porsche owners tend to pound their cars harder than BMW or Mercedes owners, so priority on the braking technology was probably oriented more towards normal street, rather than really sporty driving. For example, the electronic brake assist may be great for panic stops on the street, but it makes it damn near impossible to modulate properly on the race track. I guess we have to look at our E55's for what they are, and not compare them to lighter sports cars that were designed for that purpose. That goes for everything, from chassis to engine to yes, even brakes!

 

Hamann7 - forgive my ignorance, but upon research, the times for bmw's single piston brakes on their m-cars and our cars are very similar in numbers from 60-0 or 100-0..... What is the benefit to the 8 piston set-up over bmw's? is it fade? pls advise.

 

The test of great brakes is not how short you can stop once, but how much fade and variance occurs in your stopping distance over multiple, repeated stops. In other words, the brakes' ability to dissipate heat. If you look at the AMG 8-piston caliper vs. the BMW M calipers (including the ones on the M5) there is much larger piston volume and brake pad surface area which has obvious benefits. When I owned an E39 M5, it did stop well the first few times, but it was downright scary after a few laps on the track or pounding the canyon roads. Even if you look at the mere 4 or 6 piston setup from Porsche, you can see that their piston sizing is quite generous, which is why their calipers are comparatively large.

It can also be argued that the larger calipers promote better brake pedal feel/feedback, eliminating most of the free-play in the brake pedal. This translates into better "bite" as well as facilitating modulation, which is so important to trail braking and the way you can attack a corner. However, it's somewhat mitigated by that *******g electronic brake assist. It's ironic that AMG put this great brake setup on a car with such a substandard suspension.

 

030 is ceramic?
I thought it wasn't ceramic, just composite (ie, multipiece).

 

Correct, composite not ceramic........