View Single Post
  #58  
Old January 10th 18, 09:34 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Mad Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:28:05 -0500,
Clare Snyder wrote:

> No, they will sell you what you are willing to pay for. If you want
> "economy" friction, they willsell you "economy" friction - which M<AY
> have the same friction characteristics, but only last 50,000 miles, or
> 30,000 instead of 175000.


There is no such thing as OEM quality without having the OEM specs to
compare against. Otherwise it's just a gimmick.

There's no way for you to know if it's OEM quality if it's not to OEM
specs. Just because they *say* it in a billion web sites, doesn't mean it
is.

Specs are fact.
Marketing words are bull****.

> The "monroe premium" shoes I have "on the shelf" for my ranger are EE
> on all 4 shoes.


EE sucks. Steel on steel has a coefficient of E. Seriously. Look it up.

> The "certified" semi-metallic pads I have "onthe shelf" for the ranger
> are EF


Again, E is atrocious. Steel on stell is E. Look it up.
F is good.

Unfortunatly, there is a HUGE RANGE between E and F and even within E and F
themselves. Such is the spec.

But I'll tell you that I've never once in my life put a crappy E pad on any
disc brake. E is absolutely horrifically terrible. It's no better than
steel on steel.

F is just getting started.

I've never done drum brakes before though.

> Since the rear brakes basically "go along for the ride" unless you
> are hauling a load, the friction rating isn't TERRIBLY critical anyway


This may very well be true because I must have replaced the fronts a few
times already on this vehicle so I don't disagree with you. I'm going to do
the front pads also, so I am looking for what their friction ratings are.

> LikeI said - stupidly cheap - not worth rebuilding unless the cyls are
> not available.


The main problem with cylinders is that if I don't go OEM, I won't know the
quality of the cylinders. So I may end up putting worse cylinders in, when
their may be nothing wrong with the current ones.

Then again, maybe all cylinders are just fine in terms of quality. I don't
know. That's the homework I need to do as I've never done drums before.

> Didn't say you shouldn't. Just LISTEN to what I'm saying. BUY OE#M
> SPEC and you GET OEM SPEC.


We don't disagree. We just don't agree on what you trust & what I trust.

To me, IMHO, there is no such thing as "OEM SPEC". It's marketing bull****.

Maybe it's oem spec. Maybe it's not. Who is to say?
You trust marketing more than I do.

I trust *real* specs. Like the friction coefficient.
That's a real spec.
Not marketing bull****.

Why do you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM
spec *is* the OEM spec?

> Listen to one of the most experienced wrenches on this newsgroup.
> I've wrenched, I've been service manager, and I've taught the trade
> at both secondary school and trade levels. Since 1969.


I don't disagree with anything you've said, and, in fact, I agree with
almost everything you've said. Our disagreements are only in how we
interpret things like scoring and what you term "oem spec".

I completely comprehend what you're saying.
The main difference is that I trust specs more than you seem to.
And you seem to trust what I think is marketing bull**** more than I do.

It's not a disagreement in principle as if it truly was OEM spec then it's
OEM spec. I get that - but I don't believe it just because they said it.

Have you seen oil filters taken apart? I have.
They *all* meet OEM spec.
But some are better than others.
A lot better.

Why would you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM
spec *is* the OEM spec?

> ANd if you buy OEM SPEC aftermarket p[arts, they will br too. What
> do you not understand about OEM SPEC????


There is nothing you could ever say to me that I don't comprehend.
Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Really.

It's not a matter of comprehension.

It's a matter of trust in marketing bull**** or not.
You trust what I call marketing bull**** much more than I trust it.

That's the only difference that I can see where we disagree.

If I buy a food that says "all natural", what the **** does that mean?
If it says "more doctors recommend it", what the **** does that mean?

Do you know that acetominophen (aka Tylenol) is freaking dangerous?
The LD50 on Tylenol is so ****ing close to the therapeutic dose that it's
dangerous stuff compared to Aspirin.

Yet there is the J&J campaign to convince idiot consumers that "more
doctors recommend tylenol" which is a bull**** marketing statistic.

Same here with the "meets OEM specs" bull****.
Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't.

What matters is the OEM spec.
Not the marketing bull****.

We don't disagree.
The only place we disagree is that you can't believe anyone would not
believe in the marketing bull****.

SO you say I don't "comprehend" but I do comprehend.
It's trust. Not comprehension where we differ.

Why would you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM
spec *is* the OEM spec?

> No, you choose OEM SPEC from a TRUSTED MANUFACTURER - no matter who
> you buy from.


Let's drop this as I AGREE with you that if it truly is "oem spec" then
"Oem spec" is fine.

Did you know Apple said that their phones were X Ghz but they halved that
in a year? Companies don't always tell the truth.

You seem to believe them.
I don't.

That's the only difference. Why do you deny me the right to double check
that what they call an OEM spec *is* the OEM spec?

> And who says the friction material is accurately marked????


They have to meet the standard and I "presume" it's enforced by law.
Maybe it's not - but I presume that the friction rating is correct.


> You have
> no idea where the friction material came from, and if it meets the
> spec stamped on it. It is almost CERTAINLY sourced fromChina - and
> likely assembled on the shoe in China, regardless of the brand, and
> China will counterfeit anything, given the chance. This is where a
> "trusted manufacturer" comes in, as they do "quality control" and
> assure the product meets spec.


What's odd is you believe a marketing bull**** claim of "meets oem spec"
without it saying what that spec is, and yet you question a government
mandated friction test under specified circumstances.

I think that's odd in that it's reversed from normal logic.
There's nothing wrong with your logic - as it has to do with trust.

You trust marketing more than you trust the government mandate.
I'm the opposite on trust.

I trust the friction test, specifically the SAE J866A test procedu
https://netrider.net.au/threads/unde...ratings.88551/

Here's a general description of the friction ratings CDEFGH
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-...ad-technology/

> You could have FF stamped on a thich chunk of cardboard on an "xyz"
> brand part and it might not even meet the loweast spec.


What's odd is that you don't trust a government mandated standard test, but
at the same time, you trust a mere marketing term on a web site.

That's fine. You're allowed to trust marketing more than government
mandated specs - but it's the opposite for me on trust.

We only differ in what we trust.
http://faculty.ccbcmd.edu/~smacadof/DOTPadCodes.htm

I can't run my own tests like the police did he
https://www.justnet.org/pdf/EvaluationBrakePads2000.pdf

> They don't mean SQUAT if you can't trust the brand. See where I'm
> coming from???


The brand is meaningless.
What matters is what's *inside* the oil filter.
The brand is just the paint on the outside.

We differ greatly in whom we trust.

I trust in specs.
You trust in brands.

Neither one of us is wrong - we just trust differently.

> ANd over half the "enthusiasts" don't know **** from shinola - they
> just listen to other "enthusiasts" or "armchair experts"


I agree with you that the 'boy racers' out there who think seafoam is a
solution from God himself don't know much - but when it comes to "dusting",
it's pretty reliable when everyone with the same make and model and year
you have says that a certain Jurid pad will dust while the PBR pad won't
dust (where PBR and Axxis are the same pad - it's only the marketing paint
on the outside of the box that allows them to sell Axxis pads at a higher
price than PBR).

Do you see what I'm getting at?

I personally called the marketing organization for Axxis who,
interestingly, has a different channel than PBR (even though they're the
*same* pads!), and they gave me the full scoop.

Marketing bull**** 101.

You are not wrong in trusting marketing far more than I do, and I am not
wrong in trusting in actual measured specs more so that marketing words.

> It's printed on the friction material by the manufacturer - can you
> trust the manufacturer?????


What's funny is that you don't trust a government mandated SAE test, which
has clear conditions, while you do trust some blurb in thousands upon
thousands of web sites to be correct.

I find that odd but there's nothing wrong with how you trust web site
blurbs more than I trust them, nor that you trust government mandated SAE
tests less than I trust them.

It's all how you and I handle trust.

You trust marketing far more than I do.

I *know* that a PBR pad is far less money than an Axxis pad and yet,
they're exactly the same pad - only marketed differently.

Wanna know something funny?
They both have the same markings on the side.

They *have* to have the same markings.
It's the law.

The one place they can't lie, is in the markings.

> If so, trust the manufacturer to provide OEM quality.
> If not, the ratings don't mean ****.


You trust marketing more than I do.

> Like I said - BUY QUALITY and you are not guessing any more than you
> are doing it your way.


We don't disagree other than you think E is quality and I know E is almost
as bad as it gets. E is no better than steel on steel for friction.

> Correct - there was no difference undernormal driving conditions -
> they likely didn't wear the same, but they stopped the car at all
> legal speeds under normal load conditions


E is no better than steel on steel.
Look it up.
I'm not joking.

> They bopught "economy" pads - and the whiz-bang enthusiast pads may
> have been no better than what they bought,


Anyone who says "economy" or "performance" pads is falling prey to
marketing bull****.

There is no such thing as an "economy" pad.

There is a pad that has a certain spec and that's it.
If you pay a lot for it or if you pay a little for it, the spec didn't
change.

Remember, the "performance" Axxis pad is the *same* pad as the economy
"PBR" pad.

It's all marketing bull****.
The numbers on the pad are *exactly* the same because they have to be.
They're the same pad.

> Then go to the dealer and check the OEM parts they have in stock, and
> you will KNOW the spec.


You don't know the Toyota dealer in my town.
They're assholes. They're the worst.
They'd KILL me if I told them I just wanted to *look* at their pads.
I'm serious (well, not about killing me).
But they'd tell me to go take a hike.

Only at a local auto parts store would they bother, but only if they don't
have to open the package in a destructive way.

Anyway, I appreciate your advice but that doesn't mean I trust what you
trust which are the words "meets oem" more than I trust actual facts (which
are measured and tested friction ratings).

We each put trust in different things:
a. You trust marketing more than specs
b. I trust specs more than marketing

Neither of us is right or wrong - it's just we differ in whom we trust.
Ads