I have no doubt! But what else is different between your 99 and 03? Just the
age of the two vehicles (how much the suspension is worn), tires, improvement
in pad materials etc all contribute to braking performance.
With a nose heavy vehicle like a pickup 80-90% of all the braking power comes
from the front wheels so even a 50% improvement in braking capability of the
rear brakes can at the most make a 5-10% overall improvement. Just ask someone
that rides a motor cycle how well they can stop using just the rear brake
compared to using just the front.
The point is that your $600 dollar or so investment in a disk conversion for
the rear would make a much more dramatic improvement if spent on upgrading the
fronts.
Dave Clement
99 SLT+ CC 4x4
In article <c6oovr$8ev$1@bent.twistedbits.net>, andy-dml@levyclan.us (andy
levy) writes:
>
>
> My '03 stops a hell of a lot better than my '99 did. Even after a fresh
> "auto" adjustment of the rear drums, the '99 didn't have the stopping
> power this one has.
>
> david.clement@verizon.net wrote:
> > IMHO, unless you are consistently carrying a load the cost of doing the
swap is
> > going to be a waste of money. In an empty or lightly loaded truck there is
so
> > little traction out back that the rear wheels provide little in the way of
> > stopping power. That's why they all have anti-lock brakes on the back
wheels.
> >
> > Your money would better spent upgrading the fronts.
> >
> > Dave Clement
> > 99 SLT+ CC 4x4
> >
> > In article <20040427213358.59283.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>,
> > pbatson68@yahoo.com (Phillip Batson) writes:
> >
> >>
> >>Has anyone done the conversion from the drum to the
> >>disc in the rear? I'd like to get your thoughts on it
> >>before I head out to the shops.
> >>
> >>THanks!
> >>
> >>=====
> >>Phil
> >>2000 4x4 CC 4.7L
> >>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 01 2004 - 12:00:18 EDT