Just joined? Please introduce yourself.
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Installing larger '59 - '64 larger drum brakes on '55 - '57 Chevy

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Member #:2941
    Location
    Galt's Gulch
    Posts
    2,419

    Installing larger '59 - '64 larger drum brakes on '55 - '57 Chevy

    In years past, I have swapped larger drum brakes onto these cars with good results and that is what I will do with my present '57 Chevy. I will swap the stock 11" X 2" wide front drums and 11" X 1.75" wide rear drums for the larger '59 - '64 Chevy 11" X 2.75" wide front drums and 11" X 2.0" wide rear drums. Will keep the manual adjusters and run a really good ceramic brake shoe lining. Will also add a rebuilt Bendix remote mount power brake booster similar to those used on '57 - '58 Cadillacs and GMC trucks. From past experience, I'm sure the '57 will stop just fine.

    Before this evening, I hadn't really sat down and done the math regarding swept area of disc brake rotors versus same diameter drum brakes of various widths and all that. Just knew from past experience that everything else being equal...... Bigger is better when it comes to discs or drums.

    Found an interesting old thread on this very subject on a British forum this evening......

    https://www.britishcarforum.com/bcf/...ea-calculation

    Anyway...... By swapping '59 - '64 Chevy drum brakes onto my '57 Chevy (going from 11" X 2.0" wide front brakes and 11" X 1-3/4" rear brakes to 11" X 2.75" wide front brakes and 11" X 2.0" rear brakes)...... I will increase swept area of front brakes by 37.5% and swept area of rear brakes by 14.28%.

    From the article on the British forum linked above...... 11" disc brake rotor has 45 sq. in. of swept area per side X 2 sides = 90 sq. in. total swept area.

    My present 11" X 2.0" wide front drums have only 69.1152 sq. in. swept area. However, after swapping the wider 11" X 2.75" wide front drums onto the '57, swept area increases to 95.0334 sq. in.

    So thought that was an interesting comparison. I'll let you know how it works out.

    Happy Motoring,

    Harry
    Last edited by enigma57; 07-25-2020 at 02:46 AM.

  2. #2
    Registered Member 55Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020

    Member #:4375
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by enigma57 View Post
    In years past, I have swapped larger drum brakes onto these cars with good results and that is what I will do with my present '57 Chevy. I will swap the stock 11" X 2" wide front drums and 11" X 1.75" wide rear drums for the larger '59 - '64 Chevy 11" X 2.75" wide front drums and 11" X 2.0" wide rear drums. Will keep the manual adjusters and run a really good ceramic brake shoe lining. Will also add a rebuilt Bendix remote mount power brake booster similar to those used on '57 - '58 Cadillacs and GMC trucks. From past experience, I'm sure the '57 will stop just fine.

    Before this evening, I hadn't really sat down and done the math regarding swept area of disc brake rotors versus same diameter drum brakes of various widths and all that. Just knew from past experience that everything else being equal...... Bigger is better when it comes to discs or drums.

    Found an interesting old thread on this very subject on a British forum this evening......

    https://www.britishcarforum.com/bcf/...ea-calculation

    Anyway...... By swapping '59 - '64 Chevy drum brakes onto my '57 Chevy (going from 11" X 2.0" wide front brakes and 11" X 1-3/4" rear brakes to 11" X 2.75" wide front brakes and 11" X 2.0" rear brakes)...... I will increase swept area of front brakes by 37.5% and swept area of rear brakes by 14.28%.

    From the article on the British forum linked above...... 11" disc brake rotor has 45 sq. in. of swept area per side X 2 sides = 90 sq. in. total swept area.

    My present 11" X 2.0" wide front drums have only 69.1152 sq. in. swept area. However, after swapping the wider 11" X 2.75" wide front drums onto the '57, swept area increases to 95.0334 sq. in.

    So thought that was an interesting comparison. I'll let you know how it works out.

    Happy Motoring,

    Harry

    That is interesting.

    Just curious Harry, is there any particular reason you want to stay with drum brakes over disc? At least on the front?

    I remember when I was a teenager my father did a similar upgrade on a 57 3100 pickup to bigger drum brakes. He installed a Case 580B backhoe diesel engine (188) into the 57, upgraded to larger drum brakes, installed a electric-switched overdrive gearbox behind the transmission. The darn thing got about 50 miles to the gallon. Only had a 10 gallon fuel tank. It was fill her up and forget her. I drove that thing all over the farm and the small town we grew up in. It had so much torque you could start in 3rd gear from a dead stop if you wanted to. Wish I still had a picture, but I can't find one. Still got some junk to go through.... so maybe.

    Oh yeah, the reason he did it was because that is what he had on hand. He used to keep some junk cars and trucks in his back lot.

    j

  3. #3
    Registered Member BamaNomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Member #:3217
    Location
    Rocket City, USA (Huntsville, AL area)
    Posts
    3,774
    Larger drum brakes will help greatly without penalty, so long as you don't do 'repeated' emergency stops (drums don't cool as quickly as disks), and stay out of deep water (drums don't drain out water very quickly either)...

  4. #4
    Registered Member 55Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020

    Member #:4375
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaNomad View Post
    Larger drum brakes will help greatly without penalty, so long as you don't do 'repeated' emergency stops (drums don't cool as quickly as disks), and stay out of deep water (drums don't drain out water very quickly either)...
    Gary,
    That is why I was asking. You know how wet it gets in Alabama and brakes was always the first thing I converted. I grew up with drums, but I prefer a disc break on the front at the very least.

    I figured Harry was just trying to keep the original look, but I am always curious about peoples thought process.

    I am simple. I prefer my cars to be classics that drive and handle like modern cars. I came to this conclusion after I realize that the only one of my classic cars I drove, were the restomods. I rarely drove the originals.

    Anyways I was just curious is all.

    j

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Member #:2941
    Location
    Galt's Gulch
    Posts
    2,419
    Jim, I have done this brake upgrade before and I can tell you from personal experience that if done correctly, stopping ability both from repeated high speed runs and when descending steep grades is as good as a same weight car with OEM quality 11" disc rotors. Only this time, I will add one of the large remote Bendix power brake boosters used on the heavy 62 series '57 - '58 Cadillacs and large GM trucks of the same era. These put out around 500 lbs. of force under boost when you step down hard on the brakes, so if anything I will need to learn to use a light foot on the brakes. We have quite a bit of rain and flooding here along the Texas Gulf Coast and I can assure you that stopping in the wet is not an issue with drum brakes having the right brake linings. However, I will not drive through deep water in either case unless its a matter of life or death. Hubs (front wheel bearings) may need repacking, but brakes will dry out. My main concern...... Too much chance of getting water in differential or transmission. Or car.

    Pros and cons regarding drum brakes versus disc brakes......

    1. Disc brakes are a lot easier to change out pads than changing brake shoes on drum brakes. I absolutely hate dealing with all the springs when changing drum brake shoes/linings.
    2. In my experience, I can get a more precise adjustment on drum brakes using the older style manual adjusters rather than the self-adjusting setup that came out in the early '60s. Which means I will need to jack up the car and get under there every 15,000 miles or so and adjust the brakes.
    3. No adjustment on disc brakes, but they drag a bit even when working properly and if the calipers wear differently over time and allow the pistons to rock in their bores you can get uneven braking or pulling to one side when stopping. And if they heat up sufficiently from sticking caliper pistons, the rotors can warp.
    4. With good front linings, either drum or disc brakes should last around 45,000 - 50,000 miles. Nearly twice that on rear linings (don't attempt this with AutoZone's 'Best' premium store brand linings, kids.)
    5. Yes, I know the widely held opinions regarding disc brakes having superiour stopping power and less brake fade in repeated high speed stops and when descending steep grades. However, there are many variables that affect such things (swept area, coefficients of friction, clamping force, cooling of brake parts) and it isn't always as simple as that.

    One example of large drum brakes that wprked extremely well......

    Had a 1960 Plymouth Belvedere 2dr sedan I bought in 1970. Ex-Sheriff's car. 413 engine, big AFB carb, T-85 manual transmission (column shift), 2.96 rear gearing. Holes in dash where once a gumball machine (police flashing light) had been. Ugliest car I've ever owned. But it was unibody construction and even though it was larger, only weighed around the same as a '57 Chevy 2dr sedan. And it was fast. Very fast, Geared as it was, you could wind it out to 90 MPH in 2nd gear and the 413 wasn't even breathing heavy.

    The Plymouth cop car brakes were 12" dia. drums 3" wide at all 4 corners. No power assist. Never an issue with those brakes. In fact, when we left Corpus Christi and drove to Houston so I could begin a 5-year pipefitting apprenticeship...... The Plymouth had cooling issues (blown head gasket). So I bought a bone stock '55 Chevy business coupe (235 6-banger, 3-speed on the column) and towed the Plymouth to Houston.

    It was around 225 miles. We had all our possessions loaded into both cars. I pulled the Plymouth on a chain. Wife and eldest son (18 mo. old) were in the Plymouth. I gave her hand signals and she kept the chain tight and used the Plymouth's brakes to slow or stop both cars. Made it into Houston about 20 minutes drive from our destination in the Heights when some idiot cut us off and I had to get down on the Chevy's brakes.

    Chain went slack and wife jammed on the Plymouth's brakes to stop us both. One of the Plymouth's front wheels was on top of the chain when she did that and by the time we had gone from 70 MPH to a full stop on the shoulder of I-10, the chain had worn through. So we locked the Plymouth and I took wife and baby to my folks' house in the Chevy. Got my Step-dad to take me back to where we left the Plymouth with most of our possessions in it. Filled the radiator and cranked it up blown head gasket and all. Made it home before the engine got too hot and shut it down.

    Happy Motoring,

    Harry

  6. #6
    Registered Member
    Join Date
    May 2012

    Member #:625
    Posts
    3,409
    In the 70s when I used to run the wheels off my 67 Camaro at the strip, I had to stop and let the brakes cool if I made more than two passes back to back. I converted to a factory 67 Camaro ft disk setup and could make all the back to back passes I wanted. The only issue with this setup was expensive to maintain 4 piston calipers. In the 80s I converted to 69 Camaro single piston and have not worked on them since. I am sold on front disk, rear ones not so much.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •