Who has rear brakes only?

A group of cars in a caravan are headed to a show, one of the cars only has rear brakes, suddenly the cars have to slow down because of construction on the highway, the driver with rear brakes only can't stop fast enough, so he plows into the custom in front of him. Do you want this to happen to you? Run brakes all the way around.

 

Most people that answer this post have never driven a car with "just rear brakes"(including me ...sort of...it stopped)...only rear brakes (juice)prolly stop better than the cars driving with full mechanical.

 

Bad idea..Plus its hard to do power brake burn outs without front brakes :~)

 

The reason most people answering have not driven cars without front brakes is that they are still alive...
i test drove my '27 a bit when in fab stage with a 327/4spd and it was useless even with perfect new rear brakes. as said with front brakes you ahve weight transfer that actually helps plant teh tires, out back you have the opposite, not not the to extent some have said, because you have to remember with no front brakes you won't get the nose dive they create under braking...
It's even worse than the guys with 500hp and still running drum brakes and ball bearings up front...we even run 4 wheel disc on our race cars(avatar)...and we have a chute and miles of desert to slow down before we hit the mountain...

 

Remember when you used to ride your bicycle and you applied the rear brakes only?
It slowed down right?
Bet it didn't stop too quick though.
Went thru the same drill on my '36 SBC Ford coupe (3500 pounds!) and it was scary!
Went to GM 11 inch disc in front and big Econoline drums in the rear. Stopped like a normal car after that.
Replacement noses for '36 Fords are hard to come by and expen$ive, front brakes are the better alternative.

 

And everybody elses life
Lars

 

A general rule thumb says of 100% of your car braking 60% is done by your front brakes so that means only 40% is done by the rear.

If you still can not see what I am getting, try stopping with your E brake and that will give you a feel for what to expect from your brake performance and then add a wet road.

If you are still not convinced you will need to change your name to Lucky.

 

Edit; Re; a couple of posts down, and a couple of subsequent posts in this thread that appear to be a one sided argument, then it's because I 'bailed'...again.
I apologize for getting ****ed into the ******** from another thread about my reasons not to post pictures, or whether I 'bailed' or not.. ha. ??
I have deleted all of my replies that I can, realizing that I too, contributed to a ******* contest, and the discussion is moot. It's easy because I have no need to 'prove' **** to anybody. If they dont believe my R&P is absent bump steer, so what?
I'm trying. I really am.
Edit;

 

this info would've been more helpful FIFTY SIX posts ago

 

NOT with the above mentioned rear only brakes

 

Isn't that the truth!
Yet...when you were asked to explain the principles of "frame mounted R&P to tube axle" to the uninformed in the R&P thread you just bailed.
Talking to the "people who have done it" isn't gonna get the truth out if the "all knowing" don't talk back...

This is just total baloney.
I ***ume you mean the percentage of weight up front compared to the weight out back and the center of gravity's effect on weight transfer?
Put more weight out back to compensate for a lack of braking up front???

All that will do is give you a sideways pendulum effect when the rear brakes lock up. and they will...

I've driven rear weight biased Dune buggys with only rear brakes that had an extremely low C of G, and you need to be planning far ahead for your braking. You don't stop fast and you don't stop straight...unless you plan your moves far in advance.
You think you can PLAN in todays traffic...or when Timmy chases his ball into the street?

BTW...what cars in the 40's and 50's had no front brakes? I can't think of a single reason a "street car" built in those times wouldn't have front brakes...except lazyness on the part of the builder.

Back in the days where rear brake systems were changed to 4 wheel by the manufacturers, it wasn't easy to design a mechanical system that could apply front brakes evenly and still turn the front wheels. They still did it because they HAD to.
Speeds were up and the roads were smooth. You weren't locked in ruts on a farm road anymore...

This T bucket you aspire to?
Most of the cars on the HAMB don't have the extreme tire difference of this imaginary T bucket you mention. That was a 70's onward thing.
Unless your talking Hallcrafts and bike tires which are pretty much junk for anything that actually drives, then a skinny set of 5.25's or whatever ARE up to the task of stopping a forward weight biased car.
Look under the front fender of say...a stock 39 Ford fordor. They stopped with the skinnies up front.
Think they would stop as effectively with rears only???

You spin doctor stuff that can get people hurt, Mr man....

BTW...This IS a Trad message board. The absolute BEST one.
What's your opinion on what it is???

 

Your in an alternate reality man.....

 

Yes, skinnies on the front do not have the stopping power of full width tires. Agreed.

That they should remain unbraked because they are skinny is baloney. Ever ridden a motorcycle? They also have skinny front tires and generate huge amounts of stopping force. Many current big bikes are only a few hundred pounds off a bare bones T bucket.

My personal experience with skinnies on cars of all sizes is they stop and turn quite well, but you cannot ask them to stop and turn at the same time. One or the other. But they brake well enough to justify brake hardware. The cars on the road with you do not understand you're in the traditional era.

Compe***ion cars are another story, long live spindle mounted mags!

 

Yes...you bailed. You STILL haven't explained how you do your setup despite several requests. All you say is "Do a search".
Search for what?
Nobody agrees with you so what will a search disclose???
You bailed.

Nobody mentioned a tube axle? Oh yeah???
The first sentence of the FIRST post by the Thread starter.

QUOTE "Looking to install a rack&pinion on my 26 T touring with 4in drop tube axel."....and its mentioned MULTIPLE times thru-out the thread.
Missed it did ya!?!?

We both know your running a solid axle in this Pickup car you have built, so your posts hardly included the use of IFS...

Your right.
A good driver DOESN'T lock his brakes.
HOWEVER....A good builder installs brakes that do the job required.

BTW...if your sold on rear only brakes...why did you install discs on the FRONT axle of your pickup converted wondermobile?

Man...your so full of it.
I sincerely hope nobody ever listens to you for more than entertainment...

Arguing with you is pointless...but I'll do it anyway just to keep your advice suspect.

 

I wasn't there, but weren't these cars being powered by engines that were substantially lower in both horsepower and torque than what is commonly used today? It seems that would give you more leeway in the braking department.
-----------------------------
As far as no front brakes, I'd think that the risk far outweighs the reward. Why not run them? I can't imagine the weight savings being that much, and as far as weight transfer...can't see it making a huge difference. Maybe I'm out of line here, but I can't help but thinking about riding my motorcycle way back when. The front brake did 90%+ the work, the rear merely guided the back of the bike.

 

So Mr 29Nash are you saying that anyone who chooses to build a car that's safe to drive isn't "traditional" ? It's OK to have ****ty brakes because you said so and you haven't managed to kill yourself or anyone else yet. What is your definition of traditional ? NO modern upgrades in the interest of making the car safer, easier to drive, better handling, etc ? Biggest engine you can stuff in the smallest car you can find and safety be damned... There's been 80+ replies to this post and you and maybe 1 other guy are the only ones who think front brakes should be optional as long as you leave 500 feet between you and the guy in front of you... Yeah OK.. You're right & everyone else is wrong.. Carry on. From what I've seen so far you don't let facts get in the way of a good argument even if you're wrong...

 

Works fine on my rail. Drums too. I can lock them up even in the eyes if i want (but i dont. With rear only you always can steer. Mine wieghs 1440 without me.
A couple of the replies you got are lies but i wont say which ones. The Question of the Week then is what kind of front brakes do funny cars have?
D

 

If it's legal in the cl*** you're racing in then I guess it's your choice as long as you don't plan on driving it on the street at all. My comments were directed towards those guys who claim they've done it on the street and think it's ok.

 

a friend of mine,fred rowe, drives a light green modified roadster,banjo rear,dropped axle front,flathead v 8,manual trans,hallibrand solids in rear,10 spoke spindle mounts in front,no front brakes,hes been driving this car for years,if you went to the shows in so cal,you'd see it,he has no problem.

 

You can't fix stupid.

 

...but even that won't save you from the soccer mom with the super mocha latte, cellphone, and six screaming brats who cuts you off on the freeway. You can be the best driver in the world, yet there's always that idiot who tries to take you out.

Building a car with less than adequate braking to deal with emergencies is irresponsible, regardless of your own ability. Rear brakes only is simply not justifiable for the real world today.

I also have to say, not necessarily directed at you, that the people who say, "I know so-and-so, he's never had a problem", or "I do it all the time", are simply the exception to the rule. I know people who throw gas on fires, but now I know one personally and one online who are scarred for life and lucky to be alive. I know people who jumped on and off tractors all their lives, one even ridiculed me as twenty something "know-nothing kid" who said that was dangerous...that guy ate a tractor tire. Just because you can doesn't mean you should, and just because you've gotten away with it so far doesn't mean it's not going to bite you in the *** sooner or later.

Talk is cheap, but will you be there if someone follows your advice and ****s up? "What if" is a ***** to live with, trust me, you don't want it...and I HAVE been there.

 

i didnt read everything..but IMO..if you have a death wish..fine..but some of the other people you run across might not..no pun intended
I'd hate to see the law suit (if driven on the street) and dont think the insurance Co. would back you on this once you killed a few people..might not look good on your driving record..
now if your talking strip only action..im sure you could find a way to stop..or slow down before the traps.
good size rotors and calipers, and a chute?

 

My bucket never had front brakes on it when i first got it.The car stopped but not as good as I would like. had a few close calls many were from guys cutting in front of me then stopping. I always gave myself 2 or 3 car lenghts between me and the car in front but some figure it was for cutting in.

Yes there was a time when not running front brakes was ok but remember there was a time that not running seat belts was ok too. I can see no front brakes on light drag cars but with todays car and all the new braking systems out there running a car with no front brakes in taffic is not wise. ask me about it. been there done that.

 

You were running big tires and Disc brakes back there too IIRC...

Drag cars are in a perfect world. Thats why strips were invented actually. To keep the streets safe!
Sticky tires/dry track and no pedestrians or other moving targets you might see on a side road.

 

Should I cut off my own head? Should I slam my pecker in a car door? Dude, if its a street car you need good brakes. Drag car, I don't know if it is necessary but it should be in the cl*** rules for your car.

 

I been running old hot rods with rear brakes only for years
I like the look of old school drag cars
I have guys coming up to me and asking how I can drive my car on the street (no front brakes no rad. Hilborn injectors) the rad. is in the trunk a long with an extra fuel tank and the car runs on alk. car stops fine but I don't think I would let my son drive it to school everyday. I use to drive the vette all the time on the freeway and around town. but now I only take it out a few times a year. Rear brakes only is not for everyone but it can be done.
So I say if you have never driven a car with rear brakes only and you have some second thoughts run the front brakes

 

its not only not smart but illegal too

 

Street cars should have front brakes. You can never tell when you will have to stop short.

 

There can be no answer to logic like this. I can have eight wheel brakes and this guy is still on the highway, an accident waiting to happen.

 

All we really want is a pic of the suspension and steering. I, too, do not believe that it can be done, as well as think you either have:
1) a system with a rack AND a tie rod' or:
2) one supremely butchered setup that only "handles" well because you have no suspension travel, or no sense.

As for a search, why do YOU not post just exactly WHAT we are to search FOR??

As to those who would post, in public "I have no sense at all, and I think that one axle brakes are fine", please move to http://ratrodzaretheshizznit.dum

It's illegal and stupid. Everywhere.

Cosmo