By the way, if your disc brakes are relying on “the disc knocking the pads back into the caliper for clearance drums dont. This means there is ALWAYS more resistance on a disc brake setup as the brakes always drag a little.” than you need to get your discs replaced. As can be seen in the attached diagram, disc brakes will always contain a rubber part, in this case called a “boot”, often generically called a “square O-ring” that distends when the brakes are applied and pulls the pads back away from the disc when the brakes go back to the static position and the hydraulic pressure disappears. Your pads should not drag on your discs, nor should they need the discs to push them back away.
+1 TSMB. Also rick’s saying drums don’t drag - I was taught to adjust the drum brakes for a bit of drag, otherwise the pedal travel would be too great. So both have some drag.
" I like to take a while to fix my drum brakes "
Gee, that’s like saying I like to beat my dog. Cause when he bites me back, it reminds me of all the good companionship he has given me and maybe I should feed him better. Maybe we shouldn’t feel like we have to beat him (take so long to fix brakes) in the first place. ;=)
@ Dagosa I was eating my oatmeal iced cookies as I read this and just about chocked on them since you comment was so funny, Dagosa For the win!
Gee, that's like saying I like to beat my dog. Cause when he bites me back, it reminds me of all the good companionship he has given me and maybe I should feed him better. Maybe we shouldn't feel like we have to beat him (take so long to fix brakes) in the first place. ;=)
One advantage to brake drums that nobody's mentioned: They sound better when you hit them with a rubber mallet. When I was in college, we had several musical pieces which called for different pitched brake drums. Don't really know what part of disc brakes you would play.
Whoever knew our old forgotten friend the drum had musical talent as well…
Rick is right about discs having a slight amount of drag, they do. But then so do properly adjusted drums. One reason that NASCAR owners resisted going to discs for so long was that they could back off the drum adjustment for less drag. The only track that discs had an advantage at was the old Riverside Raceway because it had a road course section, all the other NASCAR tracks are ovals, sort of.
How do you know all three are the Sam guy? I agree that two of the posters are the same guy, but my quick look at Old-Days-Rick doesn’t show an obvious relationship.
Good article. This paragraph was definitely interesting:
The biggest sticking point was inevitably cost, but car companies were also reluctant to impugn the effectiveness of drum brakes or to imply that drums were in any way less safe (even where they demonstrably were). Not only would that have opened automakers to legal liability, it would also have invited government regulations requiring discs and perhaps antilock braking systems.
As it was, new federal regulations that took effect in 1970 required automakers to publicly disclose their cars’ braking performance in a standardized 60 mph to 0 test, data the NHTSA began publishing for the 1971 model year. Cars with disc/drum brakes didn’t always delivery outstanding performance in those tests (although cars with four-wheel discs almost always did), but cars with four-wheel drums frequently fared poorly.
. . . .