Re: DML:Rear brake conversion

From: Bernd D. Ratsch (fasstdak@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 09:52:33 EDT


Hehehehe....my old AMC Javelin was that was as well - 4-Wheel Drum (No Power
Assist). Try stopping that one in the rain. ;)

Drums don't cost much less to replace (Shoes, Drums, Hardware Kit, Wheel
Cylinders) than Discs (Rotors, Calipers, Pads)...but the safety factor is
what most look at now. The marketing ploy may have something to do with the
newer vehicles coming with 4-wheel discs...but there's still
small/lightweight vehicles with drums in the rear (so much for marketing).

Example: Neon - Base Model has Disc/Drum. Performance/Upgraded version of
Neon has Disc/Disc. It's not just a marketing ploy since the cost of both
systems isn't much different.

..and the debate goes on. :)

- Bernd

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pindell, Timothy" <TPindell@OTTERBEIN.EDU>
To: <dml@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: DML:Rear brake conversion

> But seriously folks, my friend has a big 'ol C-body Sport Fury. Drums on
> all four corners with no vac assist. It stops well enough, but you have
to
> think ahead. That pedal is two feet wide for a reason- so you can stand
on
> it with both feet! <cringe>
>
> My real question is this: Disks are so much simpler and more effective.
> I'm pretty sure everybody will agree on that point. Why aren't disk
brakes
> used by default on everything? Are drums really that much cheaper and
more
> reliable with all of those moving parts?



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 01 2004 - 12:00:18 EDT