A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Technology
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old January 10th 18, 11:08 PM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Mad Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:38:45 -0500,
Tekkie+AK4- wrote:

> Hmmm, all this have a 589 part number, what conclusion can one draw?


Wow. That's a great point. You are perceptive since I didn't even notice
that. There is a PDF that the US government puts out every few years that
must contain a lookup for *every* brake shoe or pad ever sold in the USA
for passenger vehicles.

I'll see if I can find it on the net because it allows us to cross
reference a full number (like the Centric CEN11005890-110AA1436-FF-14-N16)
to the actual manufacturer (which might not be Centric who themselves may
not even make shoes as it may be a re-brander just like Axxis and PBR are
exactly the same pads).

The PowerStop number doesn't look like the full number, so I'll skip that.

But the Bosch number looks like a full number at
FB0589-80S?-584-FF-N14-0709.

Here's an older listing from 2011 titled:
AMECA Compliance List of Automotive Safety Devices:
Friction Material Edge Codes(TM), May 2011
<http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>

It's 176 pages so I'll go through it to see if I can find out more
information about the Toyota OEM friction ratings, but I'm pretty sure that
it's getting to be a safer bet that they're FF rated shoes.

I haven't been able to find a *newer* friction-codes document yet though.
Ads
  #72  
Old January 11th 18, 12:06 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Mad Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:05:28 -0500,
Clare Snyder wrote:

> the spec you talk of is how deep the scoring can be and still
> be correctable, not acceptable - you can machine uot deep scoring as
> long as you don't excede the machining limit, which is generally
> about 30 thou less than the discard limit - but on the heavy drums of
> a 4-runner or land cruiser, is equal to the discard limit.


You bring up a good point which is the "discard limit", where I never
delved into whether the number given is the number that you start with or
the number that you expect to end with.

I always assumed it's the start limit (but it might not be).

For example, these rotors say 297mm maximum diameter.

Even if a drum passed all other tests...
- If the drum measured 297.1mm in diameter, it would be discarded.
- But what if the drums measured 296.9mm in diameter?

> Give me proof


I'll have to dig that up separately as it's on a car I don't even own
anymore so I have to dig up the spec for the rotor grooves.

But even if I have trouble finding it, may whole point is that it's almost
impossible to find a MANUFACTURER's SPEC for groove thickness failure.

(I understand your point that it's assumed it's zero.)

> . Because there IS no spec.


That may very well be the case, so let's table this until I can dig up the
spec I found on an older vehicle.

> It IS different. There is NO spec for drums. There IS a spec for
> rotors, but even there, the spec is for "in service" rotors - not for
> pad replacement.


I'm not sure what you mean by "in service" rotors.
Is that just an inspection of the rotors without a pad replacement?

> Because drums are not rotors and you are reading the rotor spec weong.


Both may be true.

> And seldom is a tolerance plus or minus 50% - so that leaves you, at
> the outside, with 120 mict=roinches with a "50%/-0 TOLERANCE.


Good observation!

> With rotors directly exposed to road grit, stones, ets it is obvious
> they WILL suffer some scoring in use, wheras drums, being enclosed
> should not. WHAT is going to cause scoring in drums?????


Another good observation.

> And the spec for rotors is for in-service failure - NOT for tolerance
> for replacing friction material.


Yet another good observation.

> Your drums did look OK in the pictures. Now just buy the OEM SPEC
> linings and get it done!!!! -


Thanks for that advice. I am honing in on the friction rating for OEM being
FF, but that's not definitive yet.

> and before you install the drums on the
> new shoes DEGLAZE THEM WITH 80 GRIT ABRASIVE PAPER tocondition the
> surface to properly break in the new friction material.


That's interesting. Thanks for the advice.
I never deglazed a rotor before.
I do the standard multiple-60-to-10mph stop that everyone does to bed them.

Thanks for the advice!
You pointed out things, as did Tekkie, that I hadn't thought of.
Much appreciated.


  #73  
Old January 11th 18, 02:47 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:34:42 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> 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.


BULL****. You are an idiot.
>
>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****.


ANd your perception is also 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 brakes work perfectly, and they are OEM spec. The shoes from ford
are the same.
>
>> 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.


Again, they are perfectly serviceable. I can makethe antilock brakes
activate on dry pavement at any legal speed.
>
>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.
>


ANd steel on steel will stop you dead in your tracks - t5he problem
with steel on steel is there is no "feel" - it is either all or
nothing.
>F is just getting started.
>
>I've never done drum brakes before though.


So you don't have a CLUE what you are spouting off about. You are
just like your idiot buddy who figured he had to do his own tire
service, balancing, and alignment because he knew better than everbody
else - nobody else was going to doit right - and yet he had to ask
stupid questions about everything on this newsgroup just so he could
argue with everyone else.
>
>> 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.


BULL****!!!
>
>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.


You've never rebuilt wheel cyls before either - and you have no idea
what quality the rubbers you will be able to scrounge are either, as
the OEM market no longer supplies them - nor does the top tier
aftermarket.

Yoiu are an IDIOT if you believe otherwize.
>
>> 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****.


If the spec is fudged, it bullshuit. You don't KNOW the spec is real.
You are an IDIOT.
>
>Why do you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM
>spec *is* the OEM spec?
>


I'm not denying you the right. Hire a materials inspection lab and
have them certify whatever product you buy before installing it. Make
shure the materials lab is certified and experienced in brake friction
material,and that all instruments have been properly calibrated to a
certified standard - otherwize you are just guessing and hoping. - you
do not KNOW anything.
>> 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".


You are an argumentative know-it-all kid (whatever your age)
>
>I completely comprehend what you're saying.
>The main difference is that I trust specs more than you seem to.


No, it's that you put more importance on knowi g the published spec,
and lest trust in the automotive aftermarket.
>And you seem to trust what I think is marketing bull**** more than I do.
>


You trust the "marketing bull****" of a stamped on friction rating,
not knowi g who stamped it on, and whether they are trustworthy or
not.

I trust major quality aftermarket suppliers to provide the correct
parts - and I have 50 years of experience backing me up. When I buy
OEM spec parts, I have no problems. If Iinstall "economy" parts, they
usually don't last as long and occaisionally do not perform as well.
>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.


And there are brands I trust, and brands I don't. Among those brands I
don't particularly trust, their PREMIUM products are top notch. It's
their "economy" product that is substandard. Case in point.
Orange fram filters are sketchy - but their "synthetic" filter - their
premium product - is perfectly adequate - as good as a standard WIX,
Purolator, Mptorcraft, Mopar orAC Delco filter.
>A lot better.
>
>Why would you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM
>spec *is* the OEM spec?


Like I said - GO FOR IT!!!. Hire a materials lab to confirm the 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.


You sure don't seem to be comprehending ANYTHING.
>
>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.


I trust major quality OEM manufacturers to provide what they say they
are providing. Ihave 50 years experience buying and installing parts.
(and troubleshooting the systems the parts are used in)
>
>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.


And asprin is al;so dangerous.

Car parts and pharmaceuticals are two different worlds.
>
>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****.
>


You are not only an IDIOT but a PARANOID idiot. Lay off the weed!!
>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.
>



You are PARANOID
>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.
>


Particularly crooked companioes like APPLE who have ALWAYS sold the
sizzle - not the steak.

>You seem to believe them.
>I don't.


I've NEVER believed Apple.
>
>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?
>

Nobodiy is denying you the RIGHT to do anything. Go buy a set of OEM
shoes from Toyota - read the specs on the material., then go buy
whatever the heck you want. Knowbody's stopping you.
>> 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 know what ASS U ME does - PREsume just does it faster.
>> 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.
>


Anything to dowith "government mandate" is open to abuse.

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


No, you trust that the spec printed on the material by some Chinese
sweat-shop . Youhave NO PROOF the material meets the spec, or that
the actual testing was done to the standard.


>
>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.


What I don't trust is an unknown manufacturer over a known supplier
of quality parts. I don't even LOOK at the "marketingbull****" that
you seem to put a lot of weight on.
>
>That's fine. You're allowed to trust marketing more than government
>mandated specs - but it's the opposite for me on trust.
>

\ Government mandated specs are, to many, just a challenge to get
around them - particularly in the Fractured States of America, where
the president is a cheat and a liar and half the country wants to be
just like him.
>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


And thiose tests showed the EE pads CONSISTENTLY outperformed the FF
brakes pretty well across the board - with the FF brakes SEVERELY
underperforming in most cases.

The Dana Ceramic family was the only FF to outperform OEM, while
HawkHead outperformed on both Chevy and Ford - and Raybestos and
Carquest alsooutperformed on Ford in the panic stop test.


Across the board, EE brakes, on the whole, outperformed the ff, and
even the ee/gg combination - so what does your frictionrating tell
you????????????
>


What it tells ME is if I buy Raybestos, NAPA, CVarquest, or Dana (all
major OEM suppliers) brakes, I will equal or excede OEM performance -
doesn't make a bit of difference to me WHAT rating they have.

If I want slightly superior hot panic braking, at the expense of
poorer cold and medium temperature braking I should buy ceramics - and
this is STRICTLY for braking performance.

Now, from REAL WORLD experience, both myFord Aerostrs wentthrough
rotors like crazy - untill I put on NAPA's Carbon Metallics a set of
pads destroyed a set of rotors at about half of pad life - and I mean
TOTALLY DESTROYED, here in Southern Ontario. That came out at just
over a year.

When I went to NAPA Carbon Metallics, the same rotors lasted for TWO
FULL SETS of pads - and over 5 years - and I was able to actually lock
the front wheels on dry pavement (rear ABS only) - which NONE of the
other brakes were capable of doing.

Never looked at the friction rating - never needed to, because
friction rating doesn't tell the whole story (as your reference so
elegantly proved)

>> 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.


Nope - The BRAND can tell you what to expect inside.
>
>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.


I beg to differ.
>
>> 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 -



And there again you would be WRONG.

Seafoam is a VERY EFFECTIVE and HANDY TOOL for solving MANY fuel
related (and some other) problems - and has been for decades.

> 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?


Nope.
>
>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.


Boy Racer brands - Boutique manufacturers - not handled by any major
distributor -
>
>Marketing bull**** 101.

Yup - Australian engineered, chinese manufactured mail-order/online
marketing excercise.
>
>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?????


Not if I don't know the manufacturer - and as your example of thecop
car test so elequantly shows - the ratings, on the whole, don't mean
SQUAT - and beyond that they do NOT tell the whole story.
>
>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.


Who said I trust websites??? You are the one giving aznd asking for
web references and specs - not me.
>
>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.
>


I DON'T trust website blurbs - I trust EXPOERIENCE - and I have 50
years of it. - half of that actively involved with the profucts on a
daily basis - long before the internet.
>It's all how you and I handle trust.
>
>You trust marketing far more than I do.


NOpe - all you trust is "marketing " - because that's all the
friction ratings are. They are a "comparison tool" - and a poor one
at that, as your tests proved.
>
>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.



And both are LIKELY crap
>
>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.


You think Chinese producers can't
lie??????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????


Ha Ha Ha!!!
>
>> 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****.


BULL****
>
>There is no such thing as an "economy" pad.


Damned right there is.
>
>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.


Damned right it dioes.

You can have 5 different FF pads - and one will be noisy as hell, one
will eat rotors for lunch, onde will corrode as soon as it SMELLS
salt, and another will turn to gravel the first time you get it hot -
ALL FF rated (or ef, or ee. or FE )

The fact it met the test requirements ONCE in the lab means NOTHING
about quality
>
>Remember, the "performance" Axxis pad is the *same* pad as the economy
>"PBR" pad.
>


The PR is NOT an "economy" AXXISS pad, it is a pad sold at a lower
markup by a different marketing company.

NAPA, WAGNER, Raybestos - ALL make more than one grade of pad -
prermium and economy being the upper and lower end - often with a few
in between.

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


Boy, do YOU have a lot to learn.
>
>> 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.


Well, I have a feeling I'd be telling you the same.
>
>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.


Good luck!!
  #74  
Old January 11th 18, 02:56 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:00:19 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:34:51 -0500,
> Tekkie+AK4- wrote:
>
>> have you checked the hoses yet? Don't bother with pix.

>
>Hi Tekkie,
>Thanks for your advice.
>Please see my detailed response to your other post.
>
>As for hoses, I'm not trying to overhaul the vehicle - so I haven't checked
>anything.
>
>In fact, I wasn't even looking for brake issues, because the owner didn't
>report any brake issues. I was simply rotating her tires for her, and since
>I had the wheels off, I popped the pins out of the rotor to look at the
>pads in front and I pulled the shoe off to look at the shoes in the rear.


o thios is not your own vehicle and you are doing brake work on it?

Ihope to hell you have good insurance!!!!!!!!
>
>So, my main goal is just to refresh the pads and shoes, but it's sound
>advice when I do the job on a weekend to check her hoses and cable for
>fraying.
>
>So what I'll do, as per your helpful advice, is buy the pads and probably
>the rebuild kit, and then when I do the job, I'll inspect from the front to
>the rear all the cables and hoses.


Call your insurance company and tell them what you are doing.
It is ILLEGAL in most provinces and states - and financially VERY
dangerous foran unqualified person to do safety related repairs on a
third party's vehicle.
>
>I'll also order a liter of DOT4 fluid (even though it only specifies DOT3),
>and I'll borrow her kid and replenish her entire brake fluid until it is
>all new too.
>
>Thanks for the advice.
>
>Remember, none of us differ except that I seem to be caring more about
>friction for friction materials while others care more about it being the
>OEM spec - both of which aren't necessarily different.
>
>However, if the OEM spec is E, I will likely refuse to put them on the
>vehicle as I have never put anything less than F on any vehicle.



Then you are CRAZY as MOST vehicles come with ee, or at best EF
brakes standard equipment.
  #75  
Old January 11th 18, 02:57 AM posted to rec.autos.tech
dsi1[_11_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 9:19:19 AM UTC-10, Tekkie® wrote:
>
> I predicted this would happen...
>
> --
> Tekkie


I can't say that I'm impressed about your powers of prediction. This happens frequently. A guy starts out with a simple question and then the thread get blown up and expanded beyond all rhyme or reason. The OP got the answer to his question early on but it's still steamrolling on. I'm not sure what the heck is going on. My guess is that this phenomenon will be studied and understood in the future by AI robots. Of course, I won't be able to say that "I predicted this would happen..." because the AI robots will have exterminated us all by then. That's the brakes.
  #76  
Old January 11th 18, 03:02 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:52:18 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:19:19 -0500,
> Tekkie+AK4- wrote:
>
>> I predicted this would happen...

>
>If simply responding truthfully, and providing referenced facts for my
>response is bothering you, I'll drop out now.
>
>I do thank those who provided advice, and I comprehended *all* the advice,
>all of which was helpful.
>
>Mostly to Clare Snyder, I appreciate his advice, born of experience, where
>he is correct that pretty much any shoe that is OEM quality will work
>unless they lie and, to Clare's point, the specs can lie too.
>
>To Clare's point on the gouges, let's forget about that since the actual
>spec from the manufacturer is almost impossible to find, and all that Clare
>found essentially said zero (where to them, zero is 0.000080", which is
>pretty darn close to zero, I agree).
>
>Besides, my drums are fine so the gouges are just an aside where I merely
>state that finding a manufacturer's spec on them for *rotors* is damn near
>impossible (but it can be done) and when I did that, I was shocked at how
>huge they were (for rotors!). I never found a spec for drums so I'll stick
>with Clare's "zero" for now - which is fine.
>
>Regarding the cylinders, I saw the post of "how would you know", where
>that's a question that is actually insinuating more than it's asking - but
>the direct answer is so simple that everyone already knows it.
>1. Visual inspection
>2. Mechanical inspection
>3. Measurements
>
>That's how you know *anything* needs to be repaired, so the question is
>moot, as you can't do #3 or even much of #2 or #1 without taking it apart
>and if you take it apart, you may as well rebuild it, which is likely what
>I'll do.
>
>Regarding the procedure, I think I have it down now, where all I need to do
>is do it, so there won't be much (if anything) to report back until I buy
>the pads, the repair kit, and do the job.


Pay up your insurance first - this is a third pary vehicle - you need
a commercial garage policy to cover your liability - and as a non
qualified mechanic, good luck getting insurance.
If something goes wrong aznd someone is killed, or worse yet maimed
for life, wheather the brakes actually CAUSED the accident or not, you
will be fighting an expensive lawsuite - even if you win, it will cost
you BIG TIME. -
>
>Thanks for all your advice and help, and please do realize that my only
>differences with Clare are that he trusts certain things more than I do and
>I trust certain things more than he does - but I understand and agree with
>all his points.
>
>I will chide anyone who puts "E" pads or shoes on a vehicle, and I always
>have, since E is the friction coefficient of steel on steel (that's a
>fact).
>
>Nothing wrong with E pads if E is the OEM pad, but if the Oem pad is F, G,
>or H, (most likely F though as G and H are less common), then putting an E
>on is below the manufacturer's spec.
>

ANd yet even police cruisers come from the factory with EE pads -
according to the information you provided.
>The nearest Toyota is 50 miles round trip, so I am on the phone with dealer
>after dealer trying to get just one of them to open up a box to tell me
>what is printed on the shoes. I'll report back what they tell me if I can
>convince one of them to open a box and look.
>
>Thanks! If I don't report back - it will be because I have no new
>information for you. Thanks!

  #77  
Old January 11th 18, 03:07 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:57:50 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:10:18 -0000 (UTC),
> Mad Roger wrote:
>
>>> I guess I need to call RockAuto in the morning at 1-608-661-1376 (Wisconsin
>>> time zone) to figure out two critical things:

>>
>> I called Rock Auto but they don't do any customer support over the phone.
>> I called three Toyota dealers, all of whom refused to provide the
>> information printed on the pad.
>>
>> One said "come down and look" but they're 50 miles round trip, so I'll try
>> at the computer first and let you know as the friction coefficient is the
>> most important job of friction materials.

>
>I found a clue to the J866a OEM friction coefficient on Amazon.
>https://s18.postimg.org/wqilqasdl/to...n_material.jpg
>
>I looked at the zoomable photos on Amazon, where out of about a score of
>choices for the specific vehicle entered, 3 of the photos had the J866a
>numbers visible which are legally mandated to be printed in every shoe.
>
>All were SAE J866a FF friction ratings.
>E = 0.25-0.35
>F = 0.35-0.45 <== Amazon shoes for this vehicle are FF it seems
>G = 0.45-0.55
>H = 0.55-0.65
>http://faculty.ccbcmd.edu/~smacadof/DOTPadCodes.htm
>
>1. $16.09 Centric 110.05890 Drum Brake Shoe
> https://www.amazon.com/Centric-110-0.../dp/B000C02PSS
>2. $21.99 Power Stop B589 Autospecialty Brake Shoe
> https://www.amazon.com/Power-Stop-B5.../dp/B003YO967W
>3. $29.14 Bosch BS589 Blue Disc Brake Shoe Set
> https://www.amazon.com/Bosch-BS589-B.../dp/B00MY5UMK2


Don't know about you, but those sure don't look like "disc brake
shoes" to me!!!!
>
>This doesn't prove the J866a friction coefficient for the Toyota OEM shoes
>is FF, but it strongly implies that they are (if Amazon is correct that
>these are OEM replacements).


And they couldwell be "stock photos" too - not necessarily what
youare buying. You are putting a lot of "trust" in Amazon.
>
>
>
>
>

  #78  
Old January 11th 18, 03:45 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Mad Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:47:38 -0500,
Clare Snyder wrote:

> BULL****. You are an idiot.


I think progress was made today with the realization that FF is probably
the Chase Test SAE J866a friction designation for the OEM shoes.
https://s18.postimg.org/wqilqasdl/to...n_material.jpg

> ANd your perception is also bull****.


My focus on specifications may be bull****, I agree, as it's a matter of
trust in the specification for the SAE J866a Chaste Test results.

Your focus on a billion web sites all accurately portraying "meets OEM
quality" is also subject to trust.

A web site may make all sorts of claims (say, for Axxis "performance"
pads), while another web site sells the base pads (say, for PBR "economy"
pads) where the numbers printed on the pads can tell me that they're the
exact same pad because marketing can say almost anything they want as long
as the pads fit.

Luckily, the numbers tell us if they're the same pads, or not:
AMECA Compliance List of Automotive Safety Devices:
Friction Material Edge Codes(TM), May 2011
<http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>

> The brakes work perfectly, and they are OEM spec. The shoes from ford
> are the same.


That's great but you saw the mention that EE brake pads are only marginally
better than no brake pad at all.
http://faculty.ccbcmd.edu/~smacadof/DOTPadCodes.htm

> Again, they are perfectly serviceable. I can makethe antilock brakes
> activate on dry pavement at any legal speed.


You have a friction coefficient at a variety of temperatures of somewhere
between 0.25u to 0.35u, which is a wide range.

I personally have chided *anyone* who uses EE pads, especially those who
did it without knowing that they were EE pads, becaues I would use FF pads
which have a measurably higher friction coefficient of somewhere between
0.35u to 0.45u, which itself is a huge range.

> ANd steel on steel will stop you dead in your tracks - t5he problem
> with steel on steel is there is no "feel" - it is either all or
> nothing.


I agree with you, as always, since I've *seen* rotors worn to their ribs,
and the cars were still being driven on the road.

All I'm saying, and all I ever said, was that I have never put EE pads or
shoes on any vehicle and I hope that I never will.

FF is fine for me as long as that meets OEM specs.

> So you don't have a CLUE what you are spouting off about.


We're talking about the SAE J688a Chase Test whose results are printed on
*every* brake pad and shoe sold in the USA. This information has been
around for many years. Here is the PDF from 2011 for example:

> If the spec is fudged, it bullshuit. You don't KNOW the spec is real.
> You are an IDIOT.


I'm sorry if my adult conversation with you has offended you.
We don't disagree on the technology.

We simply disagree on the level of trust.

For example, you trust EE pads far more than I do (and that's fine).
You also trust that every web site accurately portrays "meets OEM specs"
far more than I do, and that's fine.

Apparently you don't trust the SAE J866a Chase Test results, which are
printed on every brake pad and shoe - where I do.

We don't disagree in concept - we merely have different trust levels in
different sets of data.

> I'm not denying you the right. Hire a materials inspection lab and
> have them certify whatever product you buy before installing it.


I agree with that that what really matters is real-world experience, where,
you'll note, this report looks at EE and FF pads in Police Cruisers in
depth:
https://www.justnet.org/pdf/EvaluationBrakePads2000.pdf

> Make
> shure the materials lab is certified and experienced in brake friction
> material,and that all instruments have been properly calibrated to a
> certified standard - otherwize you are just guessing and hoping. - you
> do not KNOW anything.


Actually, I do.
If we trust in the SAE J8866 Chase Test results, we do know a *lot* about
the friction at various temperatures. And, if we match the entire code, we
know *who* actually manufactured the pads/shoes (e.g., we'd know that some
are just rebranded versions of others).

So, it seems you may be under estimating the huge amount of knowledge there
is in the direct result of SAE J866a tests printed on every brake pad and
shoe sold in the USA today.

We can tell if two pads from two different brands are the same pad, and we
can tell who actually makes every pad sold in the USA today.

It's all here, all 176 pages of it:
<http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>

> You are an argumentative know-it-all kid (whatever your age)


I'm far younger than you are and not as experienced as you are.
I don't have any experience with drum brakes.
Like many here, I have an engineering degree but it's not in this field.

> And there are brands I trust, and brands I don't. Among those brands I
> don't particularly trust, their PREMIUM products are top notch. It's
> their "economy" product that is substandard. Case in point.
> Orange fram filters are sketchy - but their "synthetic" filter - their
> premium product - is perfectly adequate - as good as a standard WIX,
> Purolator, Mptorcraft, Mopar orAC Delco filter.


Brands are a marketing gimmick.
The 176 page document proves that.

> You sure don't seem to be comprehending ANYTHING.


I apologize that you feel I don't comprehend your statements.
I think we have a difference in trust.
You don't trust SAE J866a Chase Test results; I do.
You trust marketing branding; I don't.

It's not a matter of comprehension - but a matter of levels of trust.

> I trust major quality OEM manufacturers to provide what they say they
> are providing. Ihave 50 years experience buying and installing parts.
> (and troubleshooting the systems the parts are used in)


VW was making cars for a long time, but they screwed the consumer.
Apple is an extremely trustworthy brand, but they screwed the consumer.
Wells Fargo is a great brand, but they were fabricating accounts.

What do you have against me being able to read the numbers on a brake shoe
to tell if two brake shoes are either identical in all ways, or if they are
made by the same (or different) manufacturer?

Why would you hate me having that information?

> You are not only an IDIOT but a PARANOID idiot. Lay off the weed!!


I'm sorry if you think that being able to read the numbers printed on a
brake shoe in order to tell if that shoe is identical to another shoe or
made by the same company makes me a paranoid idiot.

I'm sorry if knowing the SAE J866a Chase Test friction coefficient of a
friction material makes me a paranoid idiot.

There's nothing I can say to you if you think that, which will change your
mind. We must just disagree.

You seem to think information about friction for friction materials is bad.
I seem to think it's a fundamental first order data for any friction pad.

We will just have to disagree.

> You are PARANOID


I'm sorry you think I'm paranoid for wanting to know what the SAE J866a
Chase Test friction coefficient is for the OEM shoes and for the shoes that
I put on the vehicle.

One thing that this "paranoia" will get me, and that's the fact that I hope
to *never* put on any vehicle the same pads you put on yours, since EE pads
are, as you know, only marginally better in friction than no pads at all.

> Particularly crooked companioes like APPLE who have ALWAYS sold the
> sizzle - not the steak.


Well - we do *agree* on one thing!

> I've NEVER believed Apple.


See! There *is* common ground between us!

> Nobodiy is denying you the RIGHT to do anything. Go buy a set of OEM
> shoes from Toyota - read the specs on the material., then go buy
> whatever the heck you want. Knowbody's stopping you.


Actually, at $157 a set, I can't ask the owner to pay that much for an SAE
J866a Chase Test FF shoe when I may be able to get an SAE J866a Chase Test
FF shoe from the *same* manufacturer for around 20 or 30 bucks.

It's all in the branding that the 176-page PDF decodes for us.

> You know what ASS U ME does - PREsume just does it faster.


I'm younger than you, so I don't know all those clever repartee's yet.

> Anything to dowith "government mandate" is open to abuse.


Agreed. But you don't have any proof, do you, that the SAE J866a Chase Test
is being abused?

Even if it was abused, the standards require all pads to state their actual
company of origin no matter what brand.

Why do you hate me having this information of who actually made the shoe?

> No, you trust that the spec printed on the material by some Chinese
> sweat-shop . Youhave NO PROOF the material meets the spec, or that
> the actual testing was done to the standard.


Just a moment ago you repeatedly claimed I was paranoid.
Now you claim that the SAE J866a standards as reported in this 176-page PDF
are all faked?

AMECA Compliance List of Automotive Safety Devices:
Friction Material Edge Codes(TM), May 2011
<http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>

Where's your shred of proof?

> What I don't trust is an unknown manufacturer over a known supplier
> of quality parts. I don't even LOOK at the "marketingbull****" that
> you seem to put a lot of weight on.


Why don't you trust that the number on pad 1, if it's the same as the
number on pad 2, even if the brand is completely different, is the same
pad?

I'll open a separate discussion for the police report, as you bring up some
very good points when you assert the EE pads outperformed the FF pads.
  #79  
Old January 11th 18, 04:27 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:52 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:47:38 -0500,
> Clare Snyder wrote:
>
>> BULL****. You are an idiot.

>
>I think progress was made today with the realization that FF is probably
>the Chase Test SAE J866a friction designation for the OEM shoes.
>https://s18.postimg.org/wqilqasdl/to...n_material.jpg
>
>> ANd your perception is also bull****.

>
>My focus on specifications may be bull****, I agree, as it's a matter of
>trust in the specification for the SAE J866a Chaste Test results.
>
>Your focus on a billion web sites all accurately portraying "meets OEM
>quality" is also subject to trust.
>
>A web site may make all sorts of claims (say, for Axxis "performance"
>pads), while another web site sells the base pads (say, for PBR "economy"
>pads) where the numbers printed on the pads can tell me that they're the
>exact same pad because marketing can say almost anything they want as long
>as the pads fit.
>
>Luckily, the numbers tell us if they're the same pads, or not:
> AMECA Compliance List of Automotive Safety Devices:
> Friction Material Edge Codes(TM), May 2011
><http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>
>
>> The brakes work perfectly, and they are OEM spec. The shoes from ford
>> are the same.

>
>That's great but you saw the mention that EE brake pads are only marginally
>better than no brake pad at all.
>http://faculty.ccbcmd.edu/~smacadof/DOTPadCodes.htm
>
>> Again, they are perfectly serviceable. I can makethe antilock brakes
>> activate on dry pavement at any legal speed.

>
>You have a friction coefficient at a variety of temperatures of somewhere
>between 0.25u to 0.35u, which is a wide range.
>
>I personally have chided *anyone* who uses EE pads, especially those who
>did it without knowing that they were EE pads, becaues I would use FF pads
>which have a measurably higher friction coefficient of somewhere between
>0.35u to 0.45u, which itself is a huge range.
>
>> ANd steel on steel will stop you dead in your tracks - t5he problem
>> with steel on steel is there is no "feel" - it is either all or
>> nothing.

>
>I agree with you, as always, since I've *seen* rotors worn to their ribs,
>and the cars were still being driven on the road.
>
>All I'm saying, and all I ever said, was that I have never put EE pads or
>shoes on any vehicle and I hope that I never will.
>
>FF is fine for me as long as that meets OEM specs.
>
>> So you don't have a CLUE what you are spouting off about.

>
>We're talking about the SAE J688a Chase Test whose results are printed on
>*every* brake pad and shoe sold in the USA. This information has been
>around for many years. Here is the PDF from 2011 for example:
>
>> If the spec is fudged, it bullshuit. You don't KNOW the spec is real.
>> You are an IDIOT.

>
>I'm sorry if my adult conversation with you has offended you.
>We don't disagree on the technology.
>
>We simply disagree on the level of trust.
>
>For example, you trust EE pads far more than I do (and that's fine).
>You also trust that every web site accurately portrays "meets OEM specs"
>far more than I do, and that's fine.
>
>Apparently you don't trust the SAE J866a Chase Test results, which are
>printed on every brake pad and shoe - where I do.
>
>We don't disagree in concept - we merely have different trust levels in
>different sets of data.
>
>> I'm not denying you the right. Hire a materials inspection lab and
>> have them certify whatever product you buy before installing it.

>
>I agree with that that what really matters is real-world experience, where,
>you'll note, this report looks at EE and FF pads in Police Cruisers in
>depth:
>https://www.justnet.org/pdf/EvaluationBrakePads2000.pdf
>
>> Make
>> shure the materials lab is certified and experienced in brake friction
>> material,and that all instruments have been properly calibrated to a
>> certified standard - otherwize you are just guessing and hoping. - you
>> do not KNOW anything.

>
>Actually, I do.
>If we trust in the SAE J8866 Chase Test results, we do know a *lot* about
>the friction at various temperatures. And, if we match the entire code, we
>know *who* actually manufactured the pads/shoes (e.g., we'd know that some
>are just rebranded versions of others).
>
>So, it seems you may be under estimating the huge amount of knowledge there
>is in the direct result of SAE J866a tests printed on every brake pad and
>shoe sold in the USA today.
>
>We can tell if two pads from two different brands are the same pad, and we
>can tell who actually makes every pad sold in the USA today.
>
>It's all here, all 176 pages of it:
><http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>
>
>> You are an argumentative know-it-all kid (whatever your age)

>
>I'm far younger than you are and not as experienced as you are.
>I don't have any experience with drum brakes.
>Like many here, I have an engineering degree but it's not in this field.
>
>> And there are brands I trust, and brands I don't. Among those brands I
>> don't particularly trust, their PREMIUM products are top notch. It's
>> their "economy" product that is substandard. Case in point.
>> Orange fram filters are sketchy - but their "synthetic" filter - their
>> premium product - is perfectly adequate - as good as a standard WIX,
>> Purolator, Mptorcraft, Mopar orAC Delco filter.

>
>Brands are a marketing gimmick.
>The 176 page document proves that.
>
>> You sure don't seem to be comprehending ANYTHING.

>
>I apologize that you feel I don't comprehend your statements.
>I think we have a difference in trust.
>You don't trust SAE J866a Chase Test results; I do.
>You trust marketing branding; I don't.
>
>It's not a matter of comprehension - but a matter of levels of trust.
>
>> I trust major quality OEM manufacturers to provide what they say they
>> are providing. Ihave 50 years experience buying and installing parts.
>> (and troubleshooting the systems the parts are used in)

>
>VW was making cars for a long time, but they screwed the consumer.
>Apple is an extremely trustworthy brand, but they screwed the consumer.
>Wells Fargo is a great brand, but they were fabricating accounts.
>
>What do you have against me being able to read the numbers on a brake shoe
>to tell if two brake shoes are either identical in all ways, or if they are
>made by the same (or different) manufacturer?
>
>Why would you hate me having that information?
>
>> You are not only an IDIOT but a PARANOID idiot. Lay off the weed!!

>
>I'm sorry if you think that being able to read the numbers printed on a
>brake shoe in order to tell if that shoe is identical to another shoe or
>made by the same company makes me a paranoid idiot.
>
>I'm sorry if knowing the SAE J866a Chase Test friction coefficient of a
>friction material makes me a paranoid idiot.
>
>There's nothing I can say to you if you think that, which will change your
>mind. We must just disagree.
>
>You seem to think information about friction for friction materials is bad.
>I seem to think it's a fundamental first order data for any friction pad.
>
>We will just have to disagree.
>
>> You are PARANOID

>
>I'm sorry you think I'm paranoid for wanting to know what the SAE J866a
>Chase Test friction coefficient is for the OEM shoes and for the shoes that
>I put on the vehicle.
>
>One thing that this "paranoia" will get me, and that's the fact that I hope
>to *never* put on any vehicle the same pads you put on yours, since EE pads
>are, as you know, only marginally better in friction than no pads at all.
>
>> Particularly crooked companioes like APPLE who have ALWAYS sold the
>> sizzle - not the steak.

>
>Well - we do *agree* on one thing!
>
>> I've NEVER believed Apple.

>
>See! There *is* common ground between us!
>
>> Nobodiy is denying you the RIGHT to do anything. Go buy a set of OEM
>> shoes from Toyota - read the specs on the material., then go buy
>> whatever the heck you want. Knowbody's stopping you.

>
>Actually, at $157 a set, I can't ask the owner to pay that much for an SAE
>J866a Chase Test FF shoe when I may be able to get an SAE J866a Chase Test
>FF shoe from the *same* manufacturer for around 20 or 30 bucks.
>
>It's all in the branding that the 176-page PDF decodes for us.
>
>> You know what ASS U ME does - PREsume just does it faster.




ASS U ME make an ASS of YOU and ME
>
>I'm younger than you, so I don't know all those clever repartee's yet.
>
>> Anything to dowith "government mandate" is open to abuse.

>
>Agreed. But you don't have any proof, do you, that the SAE J866a Chase Test
>is being abused?
>
>Even if it was abused, the standards require all pads to state their actual
>company of origin no matter what brand.
>
>Why do you hate me having this information of who actually made the shoe?
>
>> No, you trust that the spec printed on the material by some Chinese
>> sweat-shop . Youhave NO PROOF the material meets the spec, or that
>> the actual testing was done to the standard.

>
>Just a moment ago you repeatedly claimed I was paranoid.
>Now you claim that the SAE J866a standards as reported in this 176-page PDF
>are all faked?
>
> AMECA Compliance List of Automotive Safety Devices:
> Friction Material Edge Codes(TM), May 2011
><http://safebraking.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/AMECA-List-of-VESC-V-3-Brake-Friction-Material-Edge-Codes-May-20112.pdf>
>


If you are so smart how come you couldn't come upwith the current
edition of the report?

Quite some engineer, Isee.

http://www.ameca.org/wp-content/uplo...ber-8-2017.pdf
is the Dec 8, 2017 versiion


>Where's your shred of proof?
>
>> What I don't trust is an unknown manufacturer over a known supplier
>> of quality parts. I don't even LOOK at the "marketingbull****" that
>> you seem to put a lot of weight on.

>
>Why don't you trust that the number on pad 1, if it's the same as the
>number on pad 2, even if the brand is completely different, is the same
>pad?
>
>I'll open a separate discussion for the police report, as you bring up some
>very good points when you assert the EE pads outperformed the FF pads.

  #80  
Old January 11th 18, 04:37 AM posted to alt.home.repair,rec.autos.tech
Clare Snyder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:45:52 -0000 (UTC), Mad Roger
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:47:38 -0500,
> Clare Snyder wrote:
>
>> BULL****. You are an idiot.

>
>I think progress was made today with the realization that FF is probably
>the Chase Test SAE J866a friction designation for the OEM shoes.
>https://s18.postimg.org/wqilqasdl/to...n_material.jpg
>

Google "counterfeit brake pads"

The results should shock you and change your mind.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
cj5 rear brake (drum) parking/emergency brake lever csdude Jeep 0 March 23rd 10 03:19 PM
cj5 rear brake (drum) parking/emergency brake lever csdude Jeep 7 March 23rd 10 09:01 AM
Parking brake/Rear drum sticking on Rabbit Bryan K. Walton VW water cooled 9 March 19th 06 01:44 PM
Parking Brake Cable and MM LCA Installation [email protected] Ford Mustang 1 November 4th 05 02:45 AM
Rear Parking Brake Cable Paul Garza Ford Mustang 3 May 14th 05 08:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ę2004-2018 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.