I have run into this "should not be turned" on one other car - I had not
realized Chrysler ever said that until you pointed it out.
The other car was my wife's 89 Lincoln Continental. I ignored that
prohibition, turned the rotors when they developed hard spots, and drove the
car to almost 300,000 Miles on the same rotors, so I think they were trying
to boost their profits. I asked at the dealership, and the service writer
(who typically knows less about real mechanics than your average fencepost)
told me the rotors were "very special, laminated with special material on
the outer layer due to the ABS system". Horse****!. They were the same
old cast material, uniform throughout.
Dick Benjamin
----- Original Message -----
From: <mopar2@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: IML: Brake repair thread - turning drums and rotors?
> The FSM says the Budd rotor should not be turned at all in bold type. Most
think
> this is for some of the same reasons you stated. I know several people
that have
> owned 67-69 Imperials & have turned the rotors without problems. As you
stated,
> don't go below a minimum thickness.
> John
>
> Dick Benjamin wrote:
>
> > I think if the original questioner will read his manual again, he will
> > discover that the prohibition is to not turn the rotor IF it is below
the
> > specified minimum thickness (or in the case of drum brakes, over the
> > specified maximum diameter) already.
> >
> > Somewhat off the point, but I strongly recommend that old car folks DO
NOT
> > turn their drums or rotors unless there is an ABSOLUTE necessity to do
so.
> > A minor score or groove will indeed some uneven braking and can cause
rapid
> > wear on the pads or linings until the new material conforms to the
distorted
> > drum or rotor, but once this break-in period is over, the brakes will
feel
> > and work just fine, and you've saved one of your car's precious
(assuming no
> > longer available) parts for another 50,000 Miles! Brake shops ALWAYS
advise
> > you to turn you drums or rotors, because it adds to their profit, and
also
> > makes for a satisfied customer because the brakes feel like new from the
> > first mile - but the cost in unnecessarily ruined drums and rotors is
very
> > high!
> >
> > There is a minimum thickness for safe operation, turning them below that
> > specific thickness risks brake failure due to fade and perhaps warping.
The
> > minimum safe thickness will be in the FSM, and is usually cast into the
> > rotor/drum somewhere to warn the brake shop. No professional brake shop
> > will turn a drum or rotor below that minimum, lest he open himself up to
a
> > monstrous liability/lawsuit, and, at least in CA, lose his garage
keeper's
> > license. .
> >
> > Dick Benjamin (who had one of those until retirement)
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <mopar2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:21 PM
> > Subject: Re: IML: '67 Imperial Parts Needed
> >
> > > I've mentioned that statement about not being able to turn the rotors
to
> > some that
> > > know more then I about disk brakes & all have said this is
unrealistic.
> > They may need
> > > to be relined sooner, but if they need to be turned to go ahead.
> > > John
> > >
> > > ceesinfielda@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mark,
> > > > If you find a source for new rotors, I'd appreciate
> > > > knowing who and where. I need a pair for my 69 Imp
> > > > and just can't seem to find any. To make matters worse
> > > > the shop manual says they are not to be turned--just
> > > > replaced.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jim Truesdale
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am in need of a RF fender, hood, grille w/headlamp assembly
(need RF
> > side) and
> > > > > rotors. If anyone has any of these items they'd be willing to part
> > with at a
> > > > > reasonable price, please let me know.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mark Harris
> > > > > New Orleans
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
> > > > > This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
> > > > > reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be
> > > > > shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
> > > > > Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
> > > > This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
> > > > reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be
> > > > shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
> > > > Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
> > > This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
> > > reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be
> > > shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
> > > Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
> > >
> > >
> >
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network