1952-59 Ford Do I really need dust shields on disc brakes

Next time I’m at Chester’s I’ll look at the buggy brakes a little closer. I’m sure the drums had a backing plate/dust shield but don’t remember if the disks did.
Dan

 

Dust shield does what it say's Not 100% dust Free , & helps keep rotors dryer ,
Debris deflection , The front outside is more protected then inside ,
I remember back in late 70s
Mr Gasket selling dust shield
For between wheel & Rotors , Then was for brake dust , This was time most Oem going to disc Standard on front .
Dam when I learn to drive around 77
@ 7 yr I was told in rain or going threw water even dew covered gr*** Fields to alway double and triple drag brakes to clear water off brake's Now 50 years later its still a habit , even when dry out side double and triple tap Brakes whatever I'm driving including big trucks.
"Amish ""
it's not just the Amish people pick and choose cherry pick !!!

 

IMO I’d run the dust shields if the car was going to be subjected to rain, snow, mud etc. If only driving in good weather may not be critical. Motorcycle disks don’t have shields or at least I’ve never seen any on a bike.
Dan

 

And I don't recall ever racing disc set ups that come with shields or ever seeing any racecars including dirt cars that run dust shields.

No shields on any the discs-





Note the mud being picked up on the rear bars and fuel cell no shields on the discs.

 

Right! Deleted. Thanks Squirrel.

 

Had a 12 year old pickup where the dust shields were rubbing the rotors due to swelling from rust. Took them off and ran it that way for several years with no issues.

 

Going off the topic concerning the disc brake shields, but...
I have been around dirt track racing for a very long time. Haven't had much opportunity to watch the suspension and tires move on video. The first video Robert posted just above really surprised me how much the front tire sidewall was deflecting going through the turns. I'm curious about how much air pressure was in that right front tire. I don't have anywhere near the knowledge Shaw has, I'm just wondering why I'm see what I think I'm seeing.

And, since I'm making dumb statements, maybe it was the angle of the camera, but it didn't look like that left front was steering as much (turning as sharply) as the right side was, especially on the hard right turns. I realize it doesn't matter much when the tire is off the ground, but it appears it pretty much just stays straight most of the time. I see some movement turning left, but basically nothing turning towards the right.

To bring it back on subject, back in the 70s, the few late model dirt track cars at our track that were still running drum brakes didn't even have backing plates on their drum brakes! There were brackets attached to the spindles to hold the brake shoes, springs and wheel cylinders, but the shoe and drum surface was unprotected from the flying mud dirt or water.

 

Wide-angle lens, useful for seeing as many components as possible at the same time, will tend to distort angular changes, so it's hard to say. Nevertheless, in motorsport forms where large slip angles of the sort we see in the video are anticipated, it is not unusual to run very little or even negative Ackermann. Textbook Ackermann is a mere geometric approximation but it gets close to tyre contact patch paths when there is no slip angle i.e. there is no lateral weight transfer. When there is weight transfer, the more heavily loaded outside tyre will show a larger slip angle than the more lightly loaded inside tyre, which does much the same as Ackermann geometry. That can result in too much Ackermann effect.

 

Thank you for the explanation.