Re: Disc brakes and front brakes on the rear?... a couple questions (repost)

[Ray Bell <raybell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

They certainly will be different front to rear...

I don't know where my earlier message went to, but I posted about the
lack of need to put bigger brakes on the rear, the rear brakes only do
about 25% of the braking at the most. I suggested that the best idea
would be to get some 11" x 2½" rears (common on pickups) and fit them,
and that you'd probably need to have a limiting valve in the rear
line, if not smaller cylinders in the rear.

Front brakes will not readily adapt to rear because of the need for
precisely located holes for the e-brake lever points and the
difference in the shape of the lower part of the shoes. Way too much
work for nothing.

Now... why do you want discs anyway?

If the car's just being used for normal driving, a well set up set of
the best drums you can get (11" x 3" fronts) will do a good job of
pulling up the car. They will heat up quicker than discs, but that
only leads to fade problems after several hard stops in a short period
of time. Like descending a mountain with lots of hairpin bends.

Ray

On Jun 29, 10:29 am, Scott Hinojos <lightspli...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I read somewhere (don't ask where, I don't know - lol ) that the
> brakes were different front to back. They must have been thinking of
> the Newport, which, according to the service manual, has narrower rear
> brakes. Another thing that bolstered my belief that the brakes were of
> a different size is that the front shoes are $10 more than the rears.
> Could it be that they are indeed different in some way, or are the
> companies like Auto Zone just confused? From the way the manual looks,
> the shoes are essentially the same. Any opinions on that?
>
> So, does anyone have an opinion on what WILL fit my car,
> disc-brake-wise? Six hundred bucks for a kit is too rich for my blood
> right now, considering all the other stuff I have to get done on the
> car, like the windshield and the weatherstrip... and paint... and
> cleaning up the surface rust... lol
>
> Thanks!
> ~S~
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:40 AM,  <Dodger7...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I think that you are right, I missed the C body part,,,,
>
> > In a message dated 6/28/2011 8:17:36 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> > 62to65mo...@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> > Hum, the parts he mentioned in paragraph one are I think for a B body swap
> > though. His 1964 Chrysler does not apply to those, does it?
>
> > --
> > --
> > Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person --
> > directly to that person. That is, send parts/car transactions and
> > negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended
> > recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect
> > your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content
> > signal to Mopar topic. Thanks!
>
> > 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
> >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.htmland
> >http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "The 1962 to 1965 Mopar Mail List Clubhouse" group.
> >http://groups.google.com/group/1962to1965mopars?hl=en.

-- 
--
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person -- directly to that person. That is, send parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!

1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 1962 to 1965 Mopar Mail List Clubhouse" group.
http://groups.google.com/group/1962to1965mopars?hl=en.