>
> I'll say one thing about this though. Brakes are MUCH cheaper to =
> replace than a clutch. Though you may save some brake wear and tear, =
> the clutch wear and tear may vastly exceed the savings you get.
>
> Pat Buthmann
>
>
> From owning an automatic, and now a 5 speed, and observing other
> people's post re: brake wear, I have detemined that a 5 speed will wear
> the brakes less than an automatic, and give longer brake life. Why? =
> Well
> with an auto. when you are decelerating you are actually running against
> the engine as well as momentum... With a 5 speed, you either use the
> engine to assist in slowing the truck (down shifting, or engine =
> braking),
> or
> you brake with the clutch pushed in (coasting), and only brake against =
> the
> momentum of the truck...
>
> I just did a front end brake job, with brake pads at 25%, and had
> the rotors turned... The rears still had 75% pad life, and no real wear =
> on
> the drums... This was at 65000 miles.
>
> Sam '95 SLT
>
I have to agree there Pat, to replace a brake pad, you have to pull the
tire, to replace a clutch you have to pull the tranny, you tell me which
is cheaper. (Hope this doesn't start the war again(auto/stick), don't
mean it to, just making an observation). Later-
bruce
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:44 EDT