Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.
It depends on the drum setup you are comparing. I just know that my disc setup put the OE setup to shame - my truck stops like my 2011 F350, maybe better.
Are there other drums that perform as well and are cheaper/easier? Probably.
With regard to the question of whether or not the OE deuce MC can be used to run disc calipers - even if it can and has the capacity and pressure capability, if I was to do it again, I would still swap in a modern two-chamber MC. The added cost is not in the MC, but in the brake booster...
I was wrong. I was remembering that the rearmost chamber actually went to the front circuit on most disc/drum setups - I was mis-remembering that the front chamber was the smaller, thus feeding the rear.
Thanks for taking the time to point out that I was wrong. Made your day I'm sure - happy...
The answer is in the article:
The fluid capacity for the entire range (i.e. pad life span) is more than the drum wheel cylinder - yes, the volume of fluid in a caliper piston can be greater than a wheel cylinder. However, upon activation of the braking circuit, the caliper uses much less...
...and when you trace the lines of those split volume master cylinders, what you'll find is the large volume section at the end (i.e. closer to the front of the vehicle) is the chamber that feeds the rear drums and the small chamber feeds the front discs.
The reason is what Steve said - even...
disc brake caliper pistons require less volume to operate than a comparable drum slave cylinder. The extension of the slave cylinder is much much farther than a caliper piston.
yes, few vehicles came with them, however, most any MD and below vehicle comes with them now. I was poking at the 'modern' part since that's what any truck in it's GVWR class would come with today.
just poking.
reliability, essentially zero maintenance, life span, braking performance (w/ 1600's).
i enjoy the disc brakes but agree w/ you that the hydraulic and booster system is just as important to upgrade and was the main reason behind the hydro-boost conversion.
i went out and looked yesterday - i can't find a PN stamped anywhere that is still visible. the rotor pictured sure looks correct, but...
i know that the inboard rotor edge has been machined (chamfered) quite a bit to clear the knuckle steering arms. i remember from talking with Steve early on...
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!