ChrisLS8 said:In reply to _ :
I get the reman ones. The 90-91 are aluminum 30mm then 92-93 were iron the remainder were 26mm
Is this just in reman land? My understanding is that from the factory:
'90-91.5 = Aluminum 26mm
'91.5 - 93? = Aluminum 30mm
94?+ = Casti Iron 30mm
OEM brake upgrade for my Mk7.5 Golf R is the Porsche base Macan front 4 piston calipers using the Mk6 345mm front discs. Bolts right on and several vendors make the necessary brake hose you need for something like $50/set.
For my 911, simple upgrade is to space out the stock calipers and use 350mm 997tt rotors. Next up is to grab a set of 996 GT3 or 997.1 gt3 6 piston front brake calipers and then the same 997tt brake rotors. That's what I'm about to install...
Mecerdes SUVs and S-Class typically have 4-pot Brembos on the fronts.
Volvo 240s also have smaller 4 pots, IIRC. They tend to be an upgrade for E30 owners.
In reply to itsarebuild :
Why do people think drum brakes suck? The ONLY time you get a noticeable difference in stopping ability on a street car is in the rain(race cars are a different matter)...beyond that...rear brakes only provide 25% of your stopping power anyway....so in the VAST majority of cases you will not notice a real difference upgrading to disc brakes. In addition to that...disc brakes are generally heavier than an equivalent drum...and parking brakes on drum brakes work far better than they do on disc brakes
That being said, there are certainly reasons to upgrade to rear discs....namely, its far faster and easier to change pads than shoes, disc brakes are more cosmetically pleasing, etc, but it is NOT needed and has some disadvantages that come with it. I am not saying don't upgrade...I am just saying that benefits for a daily driver are minimal.
Wicked93gs said:In reply to itsarebuild :
Why do people think drum brakes suck? The ONLY time you get a noticeable difference in stopping ability on a street car is in the rain(race cars are a different matter)...beyond that...rear brakes only provide 25% of your stopping power anyway....so in the VAST majority of cases you will not notice a real difference upgrading to disc brakes. In addition to that...disc brakes are generally heavier than an equivalent drum...and parking brakes on drum brakes work far better than they do on disc brakes
That being said, there are certainly reasons to upgrade to rear discs....namely, its far faster and easier to change pads than shoes, disc brakes are more cosmetically pleasing, etc, but it is NOT needed and has some disadvantages that come with it. I am not saying don't upgrade...I am just saying that benefits for a daily driver are minimal.
On neons the drum setup weighs less than the disk setup on side note. I personally like drums, they never give me many issues.
I know for AW11 MR2s People who track them swap the front calipers to the rear, and replace the fronts for ST 205 Celica calipers and ditch the booster and proportioning valve. Improved feel, braking power and balances braking across the entire car, plus the front calipers are vented (somewhat) from the factory.
Wicked93gs said:In reply to itsarebuild :
Why do people think drum brakes suck? The ONLY time you get a noticeable difference in stopping ability on a street car is in the rain(race cars are a different matter)...beyond that...rear brakes only provide 25% of your stopping power anyway....so in the VAST majority of cases you will not notice a real difference upgrading to disc brakes. In addition to that...disc brakes are generally heavier than an equivalent drum...and parking brakes on drum brakes work far better than they do on disc brakes
That being said, there are certainly reasons to upgrade to rear discs....namely, its far faster and easier to change pads than shoes, disc brakes are more cosmetically pleasing, etc, but it is NOT needed and has some disadvantages that come with it. I am not saying don't upgrade...I am just saying that benefits for a daily driver are minimal.
B-B-But the box said 10 horsepower!!!! 
I know e30 bmws used 2nd gen rx7 calipers with corrado rotors. What a weird mix!
What I find amazing is that people are able to find out what parts fit what.
In reply to Wicked93gs :
It’s not that drum brakes suck.... it’s that disk brakes are better. Sure parking brake setups may be easier and the setups themselves may save a few pounds, But there is a reason high performance cars and trucks run disk brakes.
In reply to itsarebuild :
Devil's advocate. Ferraris ran drums long after competitors went to disk. Not that I disagree with you but you don't provide the reason you state exist.
I did a JY big brakes for my MX-3. Scanning the JY I found dual-piston aluminum calipers on 2000+ Mustangs, which are commonly found and have a big range of pads, we used the inexpensive StopTech pads and they hardly showed any wear after the Laguna Seca race.
Then used 12" Mini Cooper rotors. Barely fit with 15inch wheels, well didn't fit at all without modifications to the caliper.
I think if I did it again, I'd use the smaller Mini-Cooper rotors, I think they have some 11 inch.
Not simple bolt-on at all, if that is the kind of thing this thread is about.
Professor_Brap said:Wicked93gs said:In reply to itsarebuild :
Why do people think drum brakes suck? The ONLY time you get a noticeable difference in stopping ability on a street car is in the rain(race cars are a different matter)...beyond that...rear brakes only provide 25% of your stopping power anyway....so in the VAST majority of cases you will not notice a real difference upgrading to disc brakes. In addition to that...disc brakes are generally heavier than an equivalent drum...and parking brakes on drum brakes work far better than they do on disc brakes
That being said, there are certainly reasons to upgrade to rear discs....namely, its far faster and easier to change pads than shoes, disc brakes are more cosmetically pleasing, etc, but it is NOT needed and has some disadvantages that come with it. I am not saying don't upgrade...I am just saying that benefits for a daily driver are minimal.
On neons the drum setup weighs less than the disk setup on side note. I personally like drums, they never give me many issues.
Okay, this gave me flashbacks to redpepperracing. While building my first challenge car (1st gen CRX with a D16A1 swap), I asked for some advice about swapping in the rear disk brake setup from the donor Integra to replace the pretty much dead stock drums. One member in particular couldn't quit harping on about how aluminum HF drums were a much better choice, and considerably lighter. No amount of explaining the challenge budget rules(which at the time may not have accounted for free brake parts), or the general lack of available CRX HFs in junkyards near me (much less ones that still had their aluminum drums) could convince him that I wasn't making a grievous mistake.
Oh, and to add technical content - a 1g Integra rear axle should swap directly onto a 3g Civic to convert the drums to discs, and they can also be fitted to a 1g CRX, but you have to swap out the trailing arms first.
Porsche 944 rear vented rotors slip right over the rear hubs of SWB 911's and 912's and perfectly replace the original thin, solid rotors. They even work with the internal (drum in hat) parking brakes.
911 SC front vented rotors bolt right on to front hubs on the same cars to give you increased rotor width.
Boxster calipers fit the rotors perfectly.
In reply to Stampie :
Fair push. My issue is honestly perceived performance...
1) “improved” versions of the same car platform often ditch drums for disks. The afformemtioned 1LE package...., the later iterations of my Durango. If one were to assume a manufacturer wouldn’t extend cost on a vehicle without purpose these would be bad ideas
2) the Durango’s back brakes suck. They honestly don’t even stop the engine from turning the wheels much less add 25% stopping power. This may be vehicle specific and a symptom of some other issue... but it never happens on my disk rear E30’s
(3) again on the Durango. .... clay from a mud pit gets in.... no matter what. For me this has resulted in a brake that is trapped by packed Mud into a dragging condition. And unlike disks, that can be hosed off through the wheel, clearing a drum involves a lot of actions.
again.. if you want drums I would never say you are wrong. I just don’t want them myself.
In reply to itsarebuild :
Drums actually have more surface area to act on. For example my old 60 Cadillac could lock up all four wheels at ease with drums in all corners. Once you can lock up the tires do you really get more stopping power? Where disk brakes have the advantage is they can dissipate the heat more efficiently. So in repeated braking situations disk brakes win.
In reply to Stampie :
Like I said...I’m not going to say your wrong. I’m no engineer and my opinion is based entirely on my perception. For the Durango it’s based on brake tests with the whole vehicle on jackstands and really messy brake clean outs. For the rest it is the industry and Motorsport telling me that with their actions. I’m not going to deny the Ferrari example intrigued me though.
First gen V 4 piston brembos are super cheap these days. I'll have a full set of front and rears for sale shortly after I move up to the larger 6 piston set on V.
My point was only for a street car...its not a mistake to swap to discs by any means, it just isn't going to make any difference on a daily driver...a lot of expense which will get you a parking brake that doesn't hold as well as a drum parking brake. In a truck application where you are often towing heavy loads, discs might help with downhill braking(not sure if you are using your Durango for this). A lot of people also opt for drilled and slotted rotors I have noticed....which to me compromises braking in a lot of situations...slots eat brake pads faster...and modern pads dont outgas like older pads used to...making the crossdrilled holes worthless in most situations...all those type of rotors really do is reduce surface area...but people buy them by the truckload. They may be useful in some situations...but not for 99.9% of the driving you do. Just one of those things that people are buying parts just to buy parts without taking the application into account....not every car out there is a race car...in fact...very few are...even those that we build...I have never in my life built an actual race car....so I see no point in putting parts on my street cars that don't have a practical return on investment
Stampie said:In reply to itsarebuild :
Drums actually have more surface area to act on. For example my old 60 Cadillac could lock up all four wheels at ease with drums in all corners. Once you can lock up the tires do you really get more stopping power?
Yes, because once you've locked up the brakes you're dealing with sliding friction instead of static friction. And as you probably remember from high school physics, that's a lower coefficient of friction. So you'll get more stopping power by not locking up the wheels, which means modulation, which is easier to do when your brakes are discs and not self-energizing drums.
Also, disc brakes work better in reverse. That may not be important to everyone, but when you're trying to hold a old Land Rover on a steep uphill slope with no power assist it becomes very obvious!
I'm more worried about the general concept that "bigger is better". A junkyard swap may improve stopping performance (single stop OR repeated OR both) or it may go the other way. I've had to recover a damaged Jeep that crashed because the brakes were "upgraded" with a junkyard swap and the builder didn't take master cylinder sizing into account. Heck, years ago FM sold a big brake kit that used Corrado rotors. They were bigger, but they didn't fit a lot of wheels because of the offset of the rotor and they actually increased stopping distance because the proportioning got all jacked up. They looked great but they were not complete.
Lexus SC300 can bolt on later LS400 for an extra inch of rotor.
I forget the exact recipe, but my friend used to run some sort of crazy Honda junkyard brake kit on his EFs that involved Odyssey calipers on Acura Legend brackets or some such. I remember him going down to parts stores terrorizing the employees trying to get the parts brand new.
You can swap 370z track edition brakes on to any 350z. It's an incredible upgrade taking you from stock brakes that'll overheat on track in 10 laps to akebono based multi-piston calipers with a much larger rotor. To be a bolt-on, you need caliper spacers and caliper side banjo bolts from either Z1 or other suppliers. After that, it's replacing the caliper, rotor, pads, and then you're done.
Did a few junkyard brake swaps in the day.
One of my students was talking about a caliper swap and I wondered about how to factor in the master cylinder. Can anyone give me a sense of how to account for that?
In reply to ZOO :
If you can find the data sheet for the caliper that provides displacement (piston size, number of pistons, etc.) then you can work backward from stock to figure out whether to upsize the master cylinder or downsize the master cylinder.
More fluid displacement at the caliper will require more fluid displaced at the master cylinder, but too large will result in a soft pedal or inadequate proportioning, too small will increase pedal effort and increase the pressure delivered.
There are a few brake gurus here who could probably give you a formula, I know that Wilwood used to have a decent calculator, but that link is dead when I bring up my bookmarks.
You'll need to log in to post.
