BEST BBK on the market?

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Jeff from Essex here. This is an interesting discussion, and I'm glad to see it hasn't degraded into a mine is bigger than yours argument!
Discs

• The discs in the PFC system appear to be 48 vanes, which we have seen in in other competitors'' systems. Our front 372mm disc uses 84 cooling vanes, which increases the disc face stability (we see less judder and vibration issues) and flows considerably more air (runs cooler).

• The snap ring disc assembly is slick on the PFC's, but not a major benefit in our view. Compared to the old PFC discs, the V3 is a big leap forward because they used to use an absolutely ridiculous number of hardware pieces on their 2-piece discs (we counted over 100 hardware pieces on one of them years ago)! Our discs only take about 15 minutes to assemble with 12 hardware stacks, and I think it's nice to know you have a solid mechanical connection on the disc and hat, torqued by your own hands (or those of our technicians). Thirty minutes a year to change discs is an incredibly minor amount labor in the overall scheme of track maintenance. In my ten years at Essex, I've never heard a single customer complain that it is tedious or problematic to swap the iron rings on our discs.

• Brake bias- I found this statement on the Bimmerworld site very odd, "Rotor sizing is one of the magnificent parts of this kit. Due to the high level of electronic control in the E9X braking system, brake bias is difficult to modify, but due to component design in the 4-wheel PFC kit, your M3 will have more rear bias for dramatically increased overall stopping power, under both light and full-ABS threshold braking!"
  I'm not sure what piston sizes they're using, and how that impacts a car with a front-only system. Our research and customer feedback has showed us that very closely matching the OEM brake torque output on both ends of the car results in a kit that has great feel and performance. Our front-only kit can be installed and work seamlessly with the OEM rear brakes. Our rear kit can always be added later as dictated by need, want, or budget.
  

Spares and Service

This is a big one, and a place where I've seen a lot of customers hung out to dry with PFC in the past. We've seen many occasions in which customers simply could not get their hands on spare PFC parts, particularly the iron disc rings. I honestly have no idea if that has changed, but the company has been in a period of upheaval and change since the owner's death a few years ago. Only time will tell which direction the company moves, forward or backwards.

We offer a professional caliper re-certification process.

There's no reason for it to degenerate into a pissing contest. Most of the people on the thread are just users, not dealers. The only dealer is you, but the information you provide is interesting and I welcome your contributions.
It would be nice if PFC had a marketing arm (like Essex) to extoll the virtues of their kits on forums.

It would be interesting to send my PFC front setup to Dogbone for testing.

The PFC rotors have around 50 vanes. Vane count, like piston count, should not immediately be 'better'. That kind of thinking is what leads to retardedness like Ebay calipers having 16 pistons.

It's hard to say on one hand that it's an advantage to not have to undo 2 bolts to replace pads -- also a once a year affair -- and yet 10 hardware stacks which are a nut, one or two spacers (likely different as one will be a flat spacer and the other won't be) and a bolt which has to be torqued down to a specific setting are 'not a significant problem'.

If any of your consumers compared their rotor swap procedure to a v3 procedure their mind would be blown. Perhaps the reason no one has complained is because no one has seen differently and assumes that is the only solution?

The language regarding the electronic control/bias on the M3 is pretty confusing, however, I have one car that runs the full PFC BBK and the other that only runs the front and they both work flawlessly

The death of the owner of PFC was a struggle, however, they currently operate better than they did before that unfortunate event.
I sent in my front and rear kit, and their turnaround for a full rebuild was 1 week.
Note that 'full rebuild' means recertification, all bolts replaced, pressure tested, CMMS check, etc. That's pretty good.

Lots of small things distinguish the two kits. For example, your forging is made in Asia (Taiwan?) which calls into question the marketing-speak of finest ever that was mentioned earlier.

It's surprising that people seem so concerned about under 2lb of suspended but not rotating weight delta. I don't have the PFC rotor weight but I will get it and post it. That's the weight we should worry about. UPDATE: PFC V3 rotors weigh 18.2lb, ~3lb less than the AP rotor.
That a 4 piston kit weighs X lb less is irrelevant. As you know, pistons by themselves aren't what add weight. A system that accepts a ginormous pad however is. That someone can get a system with puny pads to weigh little isn't impressive.

Reducing weight of a piece through FEA, etc is nice weight-wise, however, it does not make or guarantee a stiffer caliper.

AP builds calipers and rotors. Ancillaries, like rotor hats, brackets and such are not built by AP but outsourced. AP also doesn't build pads, which is a shame because when building and designed a kit you can't manipulate all factors to achieve a cohesive end result.

With the v3 rotors, machining is done without lube which is hard on tool life (not to mention *much* more expensive) but doesn't have the significant disadvantage of allowing that lube to permeate into the steel, which then forces a user who wants ultimate bite to 'break in' the rotor. It's nice you offer the service of preconditioning rotors but it's a problem that is self-inflicted

v3 rotors also don't have balancing marks on them like others do. The initial casting is so precise that they do not require balancing post-process, they are cast this way from the factory. And they are cast in the USA like everything else PFC does in case that matters to you.

PFC calipers have less static drag than APs. It's a fine line between avoiding knockback and having constant drag on the rotors. I'd be curious to see how freely dogbone's wheels spin if jacked up after a session because mine seems to be mostly bearing friction. I've never had knockback or pre-pumped the brakes

[dogbone]

DARN IT! Now, I have to give away the trophy for the longest forum posts to Jritt@Essex....I was just getting cozy with that trophy too!! Man, I'm gonna win that trophy back----JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE!!!!! [cracks knuckles]

Anyway, interesting stuff. Thanks for the input.

[nicksm3]

Originally Posted by dogbone

DARN IT! Now, I have to give away the trophy for the longest forum posts to Jritt@Essex....I was just getting cozy with that trophy too!! Man, I'm gonna win that trophy back----JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE!!!!! [cracks knuckles]

Anyway, interesting stuff. Thanks for the input.

Lmao!!!! Yea man, you got ruled! Jk.. I will reach out to Wikipedia to have you on it. Boom.

[SYT_Shadow]

Updated my post above

[nicksm3]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

Updated my post above

Read and I like!!!
Well said brother ...and I can’t wait to get my PFC kit this Thursday fingers crossed !

[jritt@essex]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

There's no reason for it to degenerate into a pissing contest. Most of the people on the thread are just users, not dealers. The only dealer is you, but the information you provide is interesting and I welcome your contributions.
It would be nice if PFC had a marketing arm (like Essex) to extoll the virtues of their kits on forums.

Thanks. Essex is not AP's marketing arm. We are their importer and distributor for competition parts in North America. In pro racing we directly supply teams in NASCAR Cup, IMSA, IndyCar, etc. For our aftermarket kits we have our own engineering team, and we design and build the hats and brackets to apply the AP components to specific vehicles. We work closely with Spiegler on the required brake line specifications. I believe the situation is very similar with Bimmerworld. At one point I believe they were the exclusive distributor for PFC components for all BMW applications, but I'm not sure if that is still the case. They are more than welcome to add any relevant product data to their website, and I'm sure the forum admins and their customers would welcome them to participate here. They choose not to do so.

The PFC rotors have around 50 vanes. Vane count, like piston count, should not immediately be 'better'. That kind of thinking is what leads to retardedness like Ebay calipers having 16 pistons.

I hear you on the caliper piston count, and more isn't always better by an means. At one point there was some sort of caliper piston war, and when we went to SEMA one year there were 12 and 16 piston kits on display...total silliness. That said, vane count is a completely different issue, and isn't a random design decision created for 'wow factor'. The science behind the decision to go with a high vane count has been developed over many, many years of racing experience on AP's end. There are real, tangible benefits in terms of disc face stability and cooling.

It's hard to say on one hand that it's an advantage to not have to undo 2 bolts to replace pads -- also a once a year affair -- and yet 10 hardware stacks which are a nut, one or two spacers (likely different as one will be a flat spacer and the other won't be) and a bolt which has to be torqued down to a specific setting are 'not a significant problem'.

For most people, changing pads is actually more than a once a year affair, and most people go through several sets of pads for every disc change they make. The only big advantage of the quick-change spring clip on the AP Racing caliper is in actual endurance racing. When Yost Autosport ran our kit in the 25 Hours of Thunderhill, they brought their car in for issues unrelated to the brakes, but they were able to dump some fresh pads into the calipers in seconds and really appreciated the feature. That said, I agree that one or two bridge bolts is certainly not a painstaking process, and definitely not for the typical HPDE or TT participant. In the vast majority of cases we actually recommend that our customers just leave the fix bridge in the caliper while they run it. It will add a little stiffness over the spring clip. The reason for pointing it out is very similar to pointing out the V3 disc change feature...it's a cool feature if you really need it, but not a big impact for the typical enthusiast.

If any of your consumers compared their rotor swap procedure to a v3 procedure their mind would be blown. Perhaps the reason no one has complained is because no one has seen differently and assumes that is the only solution?

Again, it's a clever feature, but it isn't a major advantage. In a race situation you'd already have a set of fully assembled spare discs on hand to drop on the car. I don't think any race team would waste the time or risk pulling discs and swapping hats in the hot pits. From my perspective, it is a solution to a 'problem' that wasn't really a major problem for most users. With OEM equipment, I've seen plenty of guys swapping discs at the track. For BBK owners however, most aren't frantically swapping out discs in the pits between sessions. It does happen for sure, but it's more of an at-home thing. It is a really cool feature though, and a huge step forward over past PFC designs. Their old designs had 24 hardware stacks in some cases, and we actually did have customers tell us that it was extremely tedious and laborious to service their discs. Therefore I think it is a big step forward for their product development, and an effort towards constant improvement. That's a good thing, and the consumer ultimately benefits.

The language regarding the electronic control/bias on the M3 is pretty confusing, however, I have one car that runs the full PFC BBK and the other that only runs the front and they both work flawlessly

Cool.

I sent in my front and rear kit, and their turnaround for a full rebuild was 1 week.
Note that 'full rebuild' means recertification, all bolts replaced, pressure tested, CMMS check, etc. That's pretty good.

That is very good indeed, particularly if it occurred during race season.

Lots of small things distinguish the two kits. For example, your forging is made in Asia (Taiwan?) which calls into question the marketing-speak of finest ever that was mentioned earlier.

AP Racing is owned by Brembo, and they have manufacturing facilities all over the world for their various product lines. In addition to brake components they design and manufacture clutches, clutch control units, air brakes, air jacks, etc. AP is at heart an engineering firm. They are ISO certified, have stringent QC procedures, and we layer our own QC program on top of theirs. If all of the supply chain oversight is in place to ensure the highest level of quality, does it really matter if the product originated in Poland, Brazil, or India?

Product arrives to us directly from England in big crates with AP Racing stamped on the sides, and we honestly have no idea where each individual component was made. Being part of a multi-national corporation doesn't put AP at a disadvantage or diminish their resources vs. a solely domestic company such as PFC. It simply gives them more options, a broader perspective, and greater reach and flexibility. If their products outperform all others and win championships, how can one call into question their being 'the finest ever' simply because they weren't built on US shores? AP also supplies the OEM brake (and other) systems for some of the most well-respected car builders in the world such as Bugatti, McLaren, and Lotus. It's doubtful that Ron Dennis was okay with putting 'foreign garbage' on his cars!

That someone can get a system with puny pads to weigh little isn't impressive.

Yes, but the fact that the AP CP9668 calipers carry a similar pad as the 4 piston PFCs, yet weigh 20% less does make them impressive.

Reducing weight of a piece through FEA, etc is nice weight-wise, however, it does not make or guarantee a stiffer caliper.

The Radi-CAL concept is not just about weight reduction. If you read the blog post we published or our product page for our M3 kits, it's more about addressing the dynamic stresses the brakes encounter when in motion. The Radi-CAL calipers were designed explicitly to combat those forces, which makes them dramatically stiffer under the actual loads they experience. On the original designs, AP saw 30+% increases in stiffness over their previous generation of calipers. Typical gains in previous generations of development were in the order of a few %. The reduced weight is simply a great side benefit of paring away unnecessary mass from the caliper where it isn't needed.

AP builds calipers and rotors. Ancillaries, like rotor hats, brackets and such are not built by AP but outsourced. AP also doesn't build pads, which is a shame because when building and designed a kit you can't manipulate all factors to achieve a cohesive end result.

As described above, AP does far more than brake calipers and discs, and they do so for F1 teams and some of the top OE car manufacturers. They also have long-standing relationships with premier pad suppliers. I wouldn't exactly say that winning over 800 Formula 1 races, numerous NASCAR Cup championships, and countless Le Mans victories shows their inability to put a cohesive brake system together! Also, just about every factory BMW racecar seems to have AP Racing brakes.

With the v3 rotors, machining is done without lube which is hard on tool life (not to mention *much* more expensive) but doesn't have the significant disadvantage of allowing that lube to permeate into the steel, which then forces a user who wants ultimate bite to 'break in' the rotor. It's nice you offer the service of preconditioning rotors but it's a problem that is self-inflicted

Brake disc rings are iron, and the hats are aluminum. I haven't yet seen any iron discs that can't benefit from a good bed-in/burnishing. We burnish over 10,000 brake discs per year for the top race teams in various series, including OEM factory efforts. The pad and disc interface is an area in which a great deal of research is being conducted by pad and disc manufacturers, and it is an important one. If the pad and disc aren't mated properly, overall performance will be diminished. There's nothing self-inflicted about it. We see it with all pads and all iron discs across all manufacturers. If PFC has come up with iron discs that don't benefit from any type of bed-in, then that is certainly a breakthrough for them. We haven't seen or heard of that in pro racing however, and there certainly hasn't been any type of wholesale crossover to PFC discs among the pro ranks because of such a technology.

v3 rotors also don't have balancing marks on them like others do. The initial casting is so precise that they do not require balancing post-process, they are cast this way from the factory. And they are cast in the USA like everything else PFC does in case that matters to you.

The only thing I've seen on the V3 discs elsewhere on this forum was one user who specifically had balance issues with their V3 discs and sent them back. That was possibly just a fluke though (and I wouldn't even rule out user error). http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1469186

Sometimes on the initial launch of a product things go wonky. It's just part of the business. I'm sure PFC will sort it out and make it right though.

PFC calipers have less static drag than APs. It's a fine line between avoiding knockback and having constant drag on the rotors.

I wouldn't say that's definitely the case just because PFC put created and ran a series of 'Zero Drag' print ads. We have thousands of aftermarket brake kits in the field, and brake drag is not a problem that comes up among our customers.

The above statement ("PFC calipers have less static drag than APs") is precisely why I chimed in on this post in the first place. I'm not trying to get at you, and I have nothing against you or PFC. PFC is a good company that makes very nice products, and I'm sure you don't kick puppies on the way to work in the morning!

The problem is that when people make statements of fact on internet forums, others without the correct information or any previous knowledge will believe them. It doesn't matter if the poster is actually dealing in facts. Calling into question AP's engineering capabilities, their inability to produce a cohesive brake system, the value of the Radi-CAL caliper's design, the country of origin on AP components, etc...those are all a bit far-fetched given the facts surrounding their products and incredibly successful history.

You are entitled to your opinion, but it is based on very limited information that has been provided to you by one source (incidentally, the source that sold you your brake system). Also, just because you aren't a paying forum sponsor clearly doesn't mean that your perspective is any less one-sided than mine. I would just ask that you look at the overarching body of knowledge / evidence that is out there, and at least consider that there are other options that may have as much or more to offer.

I'm glad you enjoy your brakes, that they get the job done for you, and that you've had a good experience with PFC. You clearly got your money's worth, and as a fellow enthusiast / track guy that makes me happy! Ultimately, if your day at the track is easier and more fun, that's what it is all about.

[jritt@essex]

Originally Posted by dogbone

DARN IT! Now, I have to give away the trophy for the longest forum posts to Jritt@Essex....I was just getting cozy with that trophy too!! Man, I'm gonna win that trophy back----JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE!!!!! [cracks knuckles]

Anyway, interesting stuff. Thanks for the input.

Lol...I'm sure it will keep changing hands!

ps My frickin' hands hurt.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Lol...I'm sure it will keep changing hands!

ps My frickin' hands hurt.

You do write long posts but I will reply

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

I'm glad you enjoy your brakes, that they get the job done for you, and that you've had a good experience with PFC. You clearly got your money's worth, and as a fellow enthusiast / track guy that makes me happy! Ultimately, if your day at the track is easier and more fun, that's what it is all about.

I agree, enjoying track days is what it's all about! I'm glad there's another serious 'prosumer' level kit on the market and if I didn't have a BBK the choice would clearly be between AP and PFC

I question your marketing language about finest ever, but lets ground the conversation in terms of both kits being at the top end of what a prosumer can buy now in my mind

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Thanks. Essex is not AP's marketing arm. We are their importer and distributor for competition parts in North America. In pro racing we directly supply teams in NASCAR Cup, IMSA, IndyCar, etc. For our aftermarket kits we have our own engineering team, and we design and build the hats and brackets to apply the AP components to specific vehicles. We work closely with Spiegler on the required brake line specifications. I believe the situation is very similar with Bimmerworld. At one point I believe they were the exclusive distributor for PFC components for all BMW applications, but I'm not sure if that is still the case. They are more than welcome to add any relevant product data to their website, and I'm sure the forum admins and their customers would welcome them to participate here. They choose not to do so.

You seem like a marketing arm to me

BW would misrepresent themselves if they said they were PFC's engineering arm. They are basically the resellers who worked with PFC to bring something to the BMW market.

I don't know whether BW continues to be the only entity that sells the Z54/45 BBK. I recall that used to be the case. Where did you get yours nicksm3 ?

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

I hear you on the caliper piston count, and more isn't always better by an means. At one point there was some sort of caliper piston war, and when we went to SEMA one year there were 12 and 16 piston kits on display...total silliness. That said, vane count is a completely different issue, and isn't a random design decision created for 'wow factor'. The science behind the decision to go with a high vane count has been developed over many, many years of racing experience on AP's end. There are real, tangible benefits in terms of disc face stability and cooling.

I didn't mean to imply AP has X vanes due to a wow factor.
However, to automatically assume 2X vanes is better than X vanes is not necessarily correct. I bet PFC has their own reason to do the number of vanes they use.

Sometimes decisions are made and I don't have all the info. Why does PFC machine the inner face of their rotors, where the vanes suck air in? Why does AP leave this surface cast?
I don't know, but machining is expensive and usually has a reason behind it.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

For most people, changing pads is actually more than a once a year affair, and most people go through several sets of pads for every disc change they make. The only big advantage of the quick-change spring clip on the AP Racing caliper is in actual endurance racing. When Yost Autosport ran our kit in the 25 Hours of Thunderhill, they brought their car in for issues unrelated to the brakes, but they were able to dump some fresh pads into the calipers in seconds and really appreciated the feature. That said, I agree that one or two bridge bolts is certainly not a painstaking process, and definitely not for the typical HPDE or TT participant. In the vast majority of cases we actually recommend that our customers just leave the fix bridge in the caliper while they run it. It will add a little stiffness over the spring clip. The reason for pointing it out is very similar to pointing out the V3 disc change feature...it's a cool feature if you really need it, but not a big impact for the typical enthusiast.
Again, it's a clever feature, but it isn't a major advantage. In a race situation you'd already have a set of fully assembled spare discs on hand to drop on the car. I don't think any race team would waste the time or risk pulling discs and swapping hats in the hot pits. From my perspective, it is a solution to a 'problem' that wasn't really a major problem for most users. With OEM equipment, I've seen plenty of guys swapping discs at the track. For BBK owners however, most aren't frantically swapping out discs in the pits between sessions. It does happen for sure, but it's more of an at-home thing. It is a really cool feature though, and a huge step forward over past PFC designs. Their old designs had 24 hardware stacks in some cases, and we actually did have customers tell us that it was extremely tedious and laborious to service their discs. Therefore I think it is a big step forward for their product development, and an effort towards constant improvement. That's a good thing, and the consumer ultimately benefits.

The 25mm pad AP accepts will likely be close to a 1:1 ratio with the rotors. I don't think there's any reason why an AP system pad would last significantly less than a PFC one as they're dimensionally similar

In a race there's no doubt you'll just have a new set of rotors+hats. I'm talking about the regular person who tracks non competitively. The same ones worried about a 1.6LB difference while they track a car with a stereo/full interior.

My front rotors are V3 and the rears are V2. The V2s have hardware stacks like yours, but based on your info they have more of them.
EDIT: The PFC V2 rotor design has been out for > 10 years and it uses 12 fasteners, 12 nuts, 24 washers and an Aluminum ring. It has fewer parts than current AP rotor mounting hardware.
The V3 swap is effortless, whereas the V2 is a PITA. If AP has 10 stacks vs 24 it's less of a PITA, but a PITA it remains nonetheless. 10 stacks = 40 pieces.
I am fairly handy and have a few DIY's on the forums and it was still a time consuming process. There's no doubt I would have lost a session had I been instructing when I swapped them.
Fortunately, the rears last a few sets of fronts so it isn't a common thing to change, but I felt the V3 was light years ahead of the V2. Halving the V2 stack count would be half the work, not an order of magnitude

I've spoken about how incredible the V3 rotor change is long before RadiCal was on the map and long before this discussion. As a regular joe blow, it is quite incredible.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

That is very good indeed, particularly if it occurred during race season.

[regarding rebuilds]

It happened a few weeks ago. Not sure if they'll be busier later in the season. Usually most track junkies are prepping their stuff in Q4/Q1, not the middle of the season.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

AP Racing is owned by Brembo, and they have manufacturing facilities all over the world for their various product lines. In addition to brake components they design and manufacture clutches, clutch control units, air brakes, air jacks, etc. AP is at heart an engineering firm. They are ISO certified, have stringent QC procedures, and we layer our own QC program on top of theirs. If all of the supply chain oversight is in place to ensure the highest level of quality, does it really matter if the product originated in Poland, Brazil, or India?

Bimmerworld, for example, has released the TE:AL wheel. I have two sets. It's a forged, 16k ton press wheel made in China.
No doubt BW has done or overseen some of the engineering and layers QC on top of it, however, I also have no doubt that if the wheels were made in Japan it would be better.

If BW told me they had produced the finest wheel ever I'd think they're out of their minds. The finest wheel ever is probably a Volk or a BBS FI -- Japan and Germany IIRC

As you know, components for nuclear submarines and the like are not outsourced to low cost countries regardless of how tight the QC is.

Plenty of products from low cost countries are good due to stringent QC, like Apple's stuff. I don't doubt AP's stuff is very good.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Product arrives to us directly from England in big crates with AP Racing stamped on the sides, and we honestly have no idea where each individual component was made. Being part of a multi-national corporation doesn't put AP at a disadvantage or diminish their resources vs. a solely domestic company such as PFC. It simply gives them more options, a broader perspective, and greater reach and flexibility. If their products outperform all others and win championships, how can one call into question their being 'the finest ever' simply because they weren't built on US shores? AP also supplies the OEM brake (and other) systems for some of the most well-respected car builders in the world such as Bugatti, McLaren, and Lotus. It's doubtful that Ron Dennis was okay with putting 'foreign garbage' on his cars!

It isn't a problem of not being built in the US. It's a problem of being built in low cost countries.
It's not like you're making them in Germany.

Why do you say AP outperforms all others? Do you have proof of this statement?

Being an OEM supplier does not mean that much. During undergrad I toured a factory making Brembo brakes for... delivery vans.
The POS brakes BMW put on the 135i were 'Brembo'. That means almost nothing.
Good brakes are good brakes and all brands build garbage when needed.
The RS4 and C63 have very impressive looking calipers which are complete garbage as well.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Yes, but the fact that the AP CP9668 calipers carry a similar pad as the 4 piston PFCs, yet weigh 20% less does make them impressive.

The 6 piston vs 4 piston makes zero difference in our cars and does not automatically make something weigh more or less. Piston surface area is going to be similar between the 6 and 4 piston.
20% less weight than the PFC system is good. I'm still curious about the rotor weight difference.

It would be very entertaining if after talking so much about 1.6lb of unsprung mass it turned out that the AP kit loses that advantage in the rotor weight -- which is significantly more important than caliper weight

Update: the V3 rotors for this application weigh 18.2lb fully assembled. ~3lb less than the AP kit.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

The Radi-CAL concept is not just about weight reduction. If you read the blog post we published or our product page for our M3 kits, it's more about addressing the dynamic stresses the brakes encounter when in motion. The Radi-CAL calipers were designed explicitly to combat those forces, which makes them dramatically stiffer under the actual loads they experience. On the original designs, AP saw 30+% increases in stiffness over their previous generation of calipers. Typical gains in previous generations of development were in the order of a few %. The reduced weight is simply a great side benefit of paring away unnecessary mass from the caliper where it isn't needed.

Yes, understood that the first time I saw the design. Engineer checking in here.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

As described above, AP does far more than brake calipers and discs, and they do so for F1 teams and some of the top OE car manufacturers. They also have long-standing relationships with premier pad suppliers. I wouldn't exactly say that winning over 800 Formula 1 races, numerous NASCAR Cup championships, and countless Le Mans victories shows their inability to put a cohesive brake system together! Also, just about every factory BMW racecar seems to have AP Racing brakes.

You are unable to manipulate all factors when designing your kits. It's the difference between iPhone and Android. One may prefer Android (I do) but it's obvious there are advantages to having all variables under your control.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Brake disc rings are iron, and the hats are aluminum. I haven't yet seen any iron discs that can't benefit from a good bed-in/burnishing. We burnish over 10,000 brake discs per year for the top race teams in various series, including OEM factory efforts. The pad and disc interface is an area in which a great deal of research is being conducted by pad and disc manufacturers, and it is an important one. If the pad and disc aren't mated properly, overall performance will be diminished. There's nothing self-inflicted about it. We see it with all pads and all iron discs across all manufacturers. If PFC has come up with iron discs that don't benefit from any type of bed-in, then that is certainly a breakthrough for them. We haven't seen or heard of that in pro racing however, and there certainly hasn't been any type of wholesale crossover to PFC discs among the pro ranks because of such a technology.

You definitely need to burnish if you're using lube for the machining. I'm glad you do this to 10k sets/year, it's especially important if your rotor has lube in the iron structure.
I will go out on a limb and assume a burnished rotor that was cut with lube is similar to a unburnished rotor cut without lube.
Still seems like an advantage that 100% of the rotors I'll use do not need a burnishing service.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

The only thing I've seen on the V3 discs elsewhere on this forum was one user who specifically had balance issues with their V3 discs and sent them back. That was possibly just a fluke though (and I wouldn't even rule out user error). http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1469186

Sometimes on the initial launch of a product things go wonky. It's just part of the business. I'm sure PFC will sort it out and make it right though.

Yup, there I am, post #4 of that thread. I wish OP had sent it in to PFC to see what was wrong. Perfectly possible it was a manufacturing defect though. I don't think anyone claims to be 100% defect free.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

I wouldn't say that's definitely the case just because PFC put created and ran a series of 'Zero Drag' print ads. We have thousands of aftermarket brake kits in the field, and brake drag is not a problem that comes up among our customers.

The above statement ("PFC calipers have less static drag than APs") is precisely why I chimed in on this post in the first place. I'm not trying to get at you, and I have nothing against you or PFC. PFC is a good company that makes very nice products, and I'm sure you don't kick puppies on the way to work in the morning!

I certainly have nothing against AP either. I'm not paid by either company and whether one sells more than the other doesn't affect my pocket. If one of us has a more vested interest in putting one company above the other it isn't me.

I'll have to look for an AP caliper car and post a video then. We'll see. I believe a friend's Noble M400 uses an AP.

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

The problem is that when people make statements of fact on internet forums, others without the correct information or any previous knowledge will believe them. It doesn't matter if the poster is actually dealing in facts. Calling into question AP's engineering capabilities, their inability to produce a cohesive brake system, the value of the Radi-CAL caliper's design, the country of origin on AP components, etc...those are all a bit far-fetched given the facts surrounding their products and incredibly successful history.

Statements made on forums are backed by the reputation of the person making them.
There is lots of tribal knowledge on the forums, many of which is incorrect. No question there.

I'll answer each of your comments separately:
-AP's engineering capabilities: not sure where I said AP didn't know how to engineer thigns. It's clear they engineer a good system, but they do not engineer the entire caboodle.
-Cohesive brake system: by virtue of you not making pads this is the case, or if you prefer softer language, you do not control all the variables. Your cohesiveness is necessarily lower than someone else who does. I'm sure it's cohesive, but it is less cohesive than if you controlled all parameters
-Caliper design: please quote where I said this. I recall saying that FEM-based mass reduction does not necessarily equal a stiffer caliper. I'd like to see whether yours or PFC's is stiffer but I doubt we'll ever get that information.
-Country of Origin: I value parts being produced in civilized countries. Not necessarily the US, but not low cost countries either. Low cost countries aren't synonymous with high quality work for the most part

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

You are entitled to your opinion, but it is based on very limited information that has been provided to you by one source (incidentally, the source that sold you your brake system). Also, just because you aren't a paying forum sponsor clearly doesn't mean that your perspective is any less one-sided than mine. I would just ask that you look at the overarching body of knowledge / evidence that is out there, and at least consider that there are other options that may have as much or more to offer.

I said from my first post on the first page that it's likely the answer to OP's question lies in either PFC or AP. No problem of open mindedness.

I'm not sure what you mean by me not being a paying sponsor. Why would I be a sponsor? To sponsor what? I don't sell anything on the forum other than old parts. I'm not sponsored by PFC... I wish I was, that way I wouldn't have dropped 8k on a BBK for one car and 4k on the other.
PFC please sponsor me!

I'm very confused when you talk about information being provided to me. It sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. The only person here being paid to support a product... is you. Only one person here works for a brake manufacturer/importer

Maybe that's why you took the time to do side by side comparisons of the two different kits and say AP's was superior in every way. It takes quite a while to get pics of both kits and go step by step as to why one design is 'old' and even dig up a case where someone had issues with a v3 rotor. There's no need to remind me of a case where they had an issue -- i know, i was there.

I am willing to bet money that if PFC/BW come to this thread they won't write a book about each and every way the AP kit is supposedly deficient and instead focus on why they think their kit is very good. I'm also sure they won't scour the forums for a case where someone had a problem with a AP kit.

[Visceral]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

... One may prefer Android (I do) but ...

Wait.

WHAT?

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Visceral

Wait.

WHAT?

Don't tell anyone but I'm using a Blackberry Keyone. Android 7.1.1. By choice! lol

[Visceral]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

Don't tell anyone but I'm using a Blackberry Keyone. Android 7.1.1. By choice! lol

I'm going to assume that there's malware on everything you own from now on. I bet your KeyOne even infected those JRZs.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Visceral

I'm going to assume that there's malware on everything you own from now on. I bet your KeyOne even infected those JRZs.

LOL!

[TTony]

If one were to base their choice mainly on BBK system weight, which way (get it, lol) would you go? I'm thinking 99% of the time this is where I would get the benefit of a BBK on my mainly street driven M3. I've got many lightweight mods that I feel make the car more enjoyable on the street (BBS FI's, a Ti exhaust, cf trunk, etc.). I also already have a Rotora BBK installed that I'm looking to replace as I'm not even sure if Rotora is still in business? The AP radi-CAL weight looks really good. This weight issue is also the main benefit I'm considering when looking at CCBs.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by TTony

If one were to base their choice mainly on BBK system weight, which way (get it, lol) would you go? I'm thinking 99% of the time this is where I would get the benefit of a BBK on my mainly street driven M3. I've got many lightweight mods that I feel make the car more enjoyable on the street (BBS FI's, a Ti exhaust, cf trunk, etc.). I also already have a Rotora BBK installed that I'm looking to replace as I'm not even sure if Rotora is still in business? The AP radi-CAL weight looks really good. This weight issue is also the main benefit I'm considering when looking at CCBs.

Frankly, for a street driven car, I could care less about shaving an extra pound of unsprung weight. For a car that is routinely at the track, it's another story.

I certainly wouldn't replace a perfectly good Rotora kit and spend thousands of dollars for something that I won't get any real extra utility out of. Then again, if looks or bragging rights are important to you, then maybe PFC or AP is "better".

[Visceral]

Originally Posted by TTony

I...my mainly street driven M3. ... The AP radi-CAL weight looks really good. This weight issue is also the main benefit I'm considering when looking at CCBs.

Please note that several of the race-oriented systems dont have dust seals, knock-back functionality, and in some cases street-oriented pads are hard to come by.

Personally, I think the idea of using radi-CAL on a street car is not wise.

StopTech make a number of hybrid solutions that have the friendliness you are probably looking for in a more minimalist (read light) platform.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by TTony

If one were to base their choice mainly on BBK system weight, which way (get it, lol) would you go? I'm thinking 99% of the time this is where I would get the benefit of a BBK on my mainly street driven M3. I've got many lightweight mods that I feel make the car more enjoyable on the street (BBS FI's, a Ti exhaust, cf trunk, etc.). I also already have a Rotora BBK installed that I'm looking to replace as I'm not even sure if Rotora is still in business? The AP radi-CAL weight looks really good. This weight issue is also the main benefit I'm considering when looking at CCBs.

I haven't driven the RadiCal on the street, but as it's similarly race-ready as the PFC, I'll give my opinion:

Real race kits as just that: real race ones. They make noise. The rotors make noise, the pads make noise even if you can get the street ones. You hear clanking. They don't have dust boots.

I have a front-only PFC BBK on the car that's mostly street but just because I want it track ready in case I want to drive a 6MT or I crash the DCT track car.

For the street I was supremely happy with the stock brake system.

[kyippee]

Originally Posted by TTony

If one were to base their choice mainly on BBK system weight, which way (get it, lol) would you go? I'm thinking 99% of the time this is where I would get the benefit of a BBK on my mainly street driven M3. I've got many lightweight mods that I feel make the car more enjoyable on the street (BBS FI's, a Ti exhaust, cf trunk, etc.). I also already have a Rotora BBK installed that I'm looking to replace as I'm not even sure if Rotora is still in business? The AP radi-CAL weight looks really good. This weight issue is also the main benefit I'm considering when looking at CCBs.

They're still in business. Bought 2 sets of pads via Loren @ Rotora just a few months ago.

[jritt@essex]

I said from my first post on the first page that it's likely the answer to OP's question lies in either PFC or AP. No problem of open mindedness.

That is true. You then followed that statement with these in subsequent posts...

"Basically, it's inconceivable to me that there's anything better than the PFC. If I had 50k to spend on brakes I don't think I'd get something else."

"There hasn't been one time when I've felt anything other than perfection from them."

"I still wouldn't swap. At the point where a kit provides infinite braking power, why would I switch?"

"It's inconceivable to me that there's anything better than the PFC"....That doesn't exactly smack of open-mindedness! Let's also remember that I didn't create the over-the-top stack of superlatives, that was from BW's site regarding the PFC's. I thought that if it was inconceivable of anything being better, maybe I could enlighten you with some actual data.

I'm not sure what you mean by me not being a paying sponsor. Why would I be a sponsor? To sponsor what? I don't sell anything on the forum other than old parts. I'm not sponsored by PFC... I wish I was, that way I wouldn't have dropped 8k on a BBK for one car and 4k on the other.
PFC please sponsor me!

My point on the sponsorship comment was that yes, my company is a sponsor here, and that yes, my posts are obviously going to be in support of our own products. That said, your posts are every bit as one-sided as mine, if not more so. Framing me as the bad guy for listing supporting evidence to back up our claims just isn't fair.

Maybe that's why you took the time to do side by side comparisons of the two different kits and say AP's was superior in every way. It takes quite a while to get pics of both kits and go step by step as to why one design is 'old' and even dig up a case where someone had issues with a v3 rotor. There's no need to remind me of a case where they had an issue -- i know, i was there.

I'm asked at least twice a day to compare our brake system with all others on the market. I have lengthy documents detailing the differences that I have posted previously on this forum an others. I wear lots of hats in my job, and product development is one of my primary roles. It's my job to know our competitors' products, and make sure that ours are better. It's what I do all day, every day.

I didn't actually have to spend any time digging up the case on the V3 discs. That thread has been lingering near the top of the suspension/brakes sub-forum for quite a while, and I check that forum regularly. You specifically pointed out how the V3 disc technology ensures superior balance, and I thought that post was a relevant counterpoint to your blanket statement about the superiority of the V3 technology. As I said, it very well could have been a fluke or user error.

I am willing to bet money that if PFC/BW come to this thread they won't write a book about each and every way the AP kit is supposedly deficient and instead focus on why they think their kit is very good.

One more time...the title of the thread was "Best BBK on the market". How exactly do you propose one describes why and how one brake kit is superior to another without actually discussing the product details of each? Is it better to just lavish a product with a list of superlatives without providing any actual information or data? Many of our competitors do that, and I think its absolutely ridiculous to ask someone to spend thousands of dollars on a product without them understanding what exactly they're buying, how it works, why it is the way it is, etc. In my experience our customers appreciate knowing the 'why' and 'how' behind our products. They don't want to just blindly follow a name.

I've said numerous times that I think PFC makes a good product. I just think ours is better, and I believe it gives our product a lot more credibility when I actually state why that is the case. Please don't try to paint me as the bad guy for doing so. I've spent many, many hours on this forum and others helping people with brake problems. Many of those problems have absolutely nothing to do with our products. I was a track enthusiast before I got into this business, and I love helping others further enjoy the hobby they're passionate about. It's one of the most rewarding aspects of my job. Check out some of my prior posts on this forum and others and you'll see what I mean. I bend over backwards to help our customers at every opportunity.

[M3SQRD]

Originally Posted by jritt@essex

Again, it's a clever feature, but it isn't a major advantage. In a race situation you'd already have a set of fully assembled spare discs on hand to drop on the car. I don't think any race team would waste the time or risk pulling discs and swapping hats in the hot pits. From my perspective, it is a solution to a 'problem' that wasn't really a major problem for most users. With OEM equipment, I've seen plenty of guys swapping discs at the track. For BBK owners however, most aren't frantically swapping out discs in the pits between sessions. It does happen for sure, but it's more of an at-home thing. It is a really cool feature though, and a huge step forward over past PFC designs. Their old designs had 24 hardware stacks in some cases, and we actually did have customers tell us that it was extremely tedious and laborious to service their discs. Therefore I think it is a big step forward for their product development, and an effort towards constant improvement. That's a good thing, and the consumer ultimately benefits.

The PFC V2 rotor design has been out for > 10 years and it uses 12 fasteners, 12 nuts, 24 washers and an Aluminum ring. It has fewer parts than your current AP rotor mounting hardware. All of your previous comments are based on the PFC V1 rotor design.

I'm running both kits - PFC on e92 M3 and AP Radi-cal 9668/9445 on f82 M4 - with the same pads and I'm extremely pleased with the performance of both kits. IMHO, you can't go wrong with either kit.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by M3SQRD

The PFC V2 rotor design has been out for > 10 years and it uses 12 fasteners, 12 nuts, 24 washers and an Aluminum ring. It has fewer parts than your current AP rotor mounting hardware. All of your previous comments are based on the PFC V1 rotor design.

I'm running both kits - PFC on e92 M3 and AP Radi-cal 9668/9445 on f82 M4 - with the same pads and I'm extremely pleased with the performance of both kits. IMHO, you can't go wrong with either kit.

Thanks for the clarification! I'll update my posts for future --gotta keep them younglings informed

Out of curiosity, which pads do you use?

[M3SQRD]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

Thanks for the clarification! I'll update my posts for future --gotta keep them younglings informed

Out of curiosity, which pads do you use?

PFC 11
CT 1521 (street)