Shorter stopping distances? Most of the cars tested by the major car magazines in the '60s usually reported stopping distances from 60 mph in the 130-140 ft range, even with the bias ply tires of the day. Typical pictures had lots of weight transfer and usually little whisps of tire smoke from the rear tires. Back then, panic stops were more of a tire traction and driver expertise test than anything else. In that situation, disc brakes per se might not have been any better, but in repeated use where brake fade can happen, disc brakes are better.
As a related item, on the new Colorado/Canyon light trucks that GM has, they are using rear drum brakes instead of discs. Probably has something to do with production costs, but they claim equal or better braking performance with that setup. I've driven them at a ride and drive event and they do stop. Goes back to the whole deal that drums and discs will stop equally well (at least once) if everything is sized properly for the vehicle they are on. Fade performance is something else that comes into play with repeated stops or stops from higher than highway speeds.
By the same token, metallic brakes were available for HD drum brake applications back then too. Chevrolet even put them in as part of the original Impala SS package in 1961, but as they took too much heat to operate and braked somewhat poorly until heated up (also meaning you couldn't stage them well at the drag strip, especially load the converter on an automatic transmission car) most people took them off and used the normal linings.
When the feds got involved in brake lining performance in the early '70s, those originally good brakes might have decreased in effectiveness, but I know that the first time or so that I move my '70 Skylark around and forget it's got power drum brakes, I'll be eating some steering wheel (even at 5mph!). Much different than my '77 Camaro with disc/drum or any newer 4 wheel disc brake vehicle.
From what I've observed in the general Mopar hobby, using the Chrysler electronic ignition conversion kit to replace a points distributor is an accepted upgrade and not frowned upon at all. Just use the regular control box and NOT the orange box OR the Mopar Performance voltage regulator. Many of the GM hobby people like the Pertronix conversion and have had good luck with it.
On those points, be sure you use some of the approved "breaker cam lube" as many replacement points sets stopped putting it in their point sets sometime in the '80s. Finding some at at auto supply is fruitless, as I discovered, as most of the employees are doing well to know what a carburetor is, much less what ignition points are. It is still around if you look for it. But if the breaker cam lobes are worn, the electronic route is the best alternative as the dwell readings and point gaps will not coincide as they need to.
My experience with our '69 Chevy C-10 CST is that those brakes are pretty marginal at best, even for 11x2 brakes. What can be done to them is to put 11x2.75" car brakes on them if you can find a wide enough 6 lug drum or redrill the car drums. I did find one listing in a parts book that mentioned HD front brakes for those vehicles, but I suspect many dealers did not order them, just as they typically didn't order the front sway bar option either. But remember too that most everything GM built back then, except possibly the Corvette, basically didn't have any brakes if they drove through a mud puddle.
The other chassis upgrade is to not change just the brakes out, but to put the whole front crossmember and suspension from the '73+ trucks under the '72 and back trucks. Bolts right in and gets lower control arms with internal rubber insulation along with the disc brakes and such--plus they most always had the front sway bar I mentioned too. That just leaves the number of lug nuts on the wheels as an issue to deal with, so they are the same front and back.
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network