Who has rear brakes only?

I had a t roadster, its on here ,with no ft brakes. I bought it that way. drove it a couple of weeks and decided it was too stupid. you needed to plan stops, carry plenty of room between cars. Ft brakes do aprox 75/85 percent of the cars and trucks.Will Rogers said it best," common sense is not as common as people think".

 

40 ford axle in my 40 studebaker g***er! must have been quite a ride!

 

Did Jimmy White ever put front brakes on that Hemi A? That thing runs so hard [I love it!] but I couldn't sleep at night knowing there were no front brakes to whoa it down in a big hurry. Ever seen a g***er lock up the rears trying to stop after a burnout? Even at such slow speeds they will drag the rears quite some distance even with big sticky tires and a clean track surface. If you're on the street run front brakes.

 

Running rear brakes only on the street is utter insanity. if you got in an accident and hurt or killed somebody....kiss your *** goodbye,and your wallet. Traditional has nothing to do with it, think of your own safety and others around you.

 

IF the car was strictly a show rig or fairground pounder, or even a shock rod that gets trailered pretty much everywhere, yeah maybe. A rig that sees any street time at all needs brakes on all four wheels.

I'll admit I like the look of 60's cars without front brakes, for the same reason I like Zingers and other stupid **** from back then. Just not something I'd do on my own cars.

I already have one car that's on the verge of not being street driveable and I won't make that mistake again.

 

????????????????
What a strange bunch!
No on the street yes at the track in an altered or dragster.
Why? Because a skidding wheel can not steer, has no directinal control so without front brakes no matter what you can still steer. Dirt track Motor cycle racers used to not run them either for the same reason.
In a race at the drags you have a straight run and then to stop. No traffic. Nothing in the way. Sufficient room.
Do I have rear brakes only on my race car?
yes. unlike 90% of the guessers here I do.
Do they work well? yes they do.
Do I have any trouble stopping when racing? No i dont.
Now for all you guys who arent aware of it. Most dragsters Red and Fed do not have front brakes. Funnys did not either. Whether they do now or not i dont know but I would guess no.
Why do you think a fueler , a rail or a funny does its burn out through the lights and then backs up ? Cause he cant do a burnout like say a pro stocker with a line lock because he DOES NOT have front brakes.
However that is a dedicated purpose. In traffic on the street , yes you need them .
If it is a light weight race car and a rail or altered etc fine. If it is a heavier full bodies racecar say above 2250 lbs for instance then run the 4 wheelers.
Don

 

Tell that to a few hundred thousand owners of pre-1928 standard equipped automobiles that drive and tour millions of miles a year, on the streed, on the highways, and byways.

 

at less than 35 miles an hour. they have to adjust their timing by hand too. should we ditch vacuum and mechanical advance? How bout we all convert to coal fired steam engines.

Go ride a horse if you're so ****in traditional.

 

mmuuuhhhahaha go ride a horse....thats a good one
but even the horses brakes with all four.But maby
i have only owned untraditional horses

 

Stanly Steamers had steam engines and no front brakes!

 

I don't think there is anyone still around to tell you how bad of an idea it was....hint hint.

 

Now that's funny!

 

Big difference between a STOCK pre 1928 motorcar and a Hot Rod with some power, speed and a loose nut behind the wheel.

Yeah but we know you're nuts Marty!

 

I run no brakes, can't get any more traditional than that. Sure I might go through extra shoes every once in a while but you can't beat the look of no brakes. I'll get bashed for saying this but all one needs is a couple of holes in the floor to put your feet down. Bet no one knew that is where the saying "to put your foot down" came from. Holes in the floor are a lot more safer than say dragging one's foot out the door.

I thumb my nose at expensive and complicated things like brake hoses, wheel cylinders, and a brake pedal, I'll stick to my stone age simple rubber shoed shoes, or flip flops if I am feeling sporty. The feeling of hot feet while narrowly avoiding some kid locking up the coaster brakes on his BMX bike is nothing short of ******ic in my very humble opinion.

Are brakes safe, some would say so. But seriously no brakes is what separates the men from the boys. I know this to be true first hand while plowing through someone's birthday party in their back yard, boys went one way and the men went the other way.

So I ask what is more fun? Being safe, or having a mother flippin' adventure every time I hop in my ride. If you said safe maybe you better go back to livin' in a bubble before I funtastically plow your dumb*** over the coolest way I know how

NO BRAKE$ RULEZ !!!!

 

i keep tellin you brakes are for sissies !!!!

 

Sounds like my Model A when I was 15, only I had 4 wheel brakes.

 

Re: Who has rear brakes only?

Maybe you could ask these guys.

Cole Foster


Jimmy White


Littleman




Probably three of the ten best builders on the HAMB.

And for the record, I wouldn't build a car with rear-only brakes.

 

now that you have put up the pictures I understand. I will take off my front brakes tomorrow.
I agree with your last sentence.
I don't think any of the picture would be less cool if they had front brakes.

 

Front brakes are going to give about 60% of your stopping power

 

I especially love the people who don't bother to read any of the previous posts, because until they said it, it wasn't important.

 

Hey............I have brand new calipers stashed in one of my cabinets along w/ my fabbed brackets I have already made.............DeathsDoorStep will be sporting front brakes.......How else would I be able to use the line-loc I still have yet to install so..........I can do angry Hemi snortin burn-outs before I stage the lights?.............Littleman...I will add...I have no propblem with what others choose to do...it's their call..

 

Hmmm. Why indeed. Hopefully in the month since this thread was started, you've changed your mind. If not, I'd advise you to get on a motorsickle, and going about 60, have some lame brain talking on thier cell phone while applying makeup pull out in front of you from a side street. Stomp down REAL HARD on with your right foot, leave your left hand OFF the front brake handle, and see what happens. While you're getting peeled off the side of the car you hit, think about the physics involved in stopping, and what end of the car needs brakes.

Brian

 

matter what you can still steer. This is some pretty goofy logic, if that were the case then roadrace cars shouldn't run front brakes either. The truth is a properly designed and operating brake systems shouldn't be locking the wheels in the first place - you not only lose steering, you lengthen braking distance as well.

Well it is not goofy logic sir.
It is a cold hard fact. Once a wheel stops rolling it can no longer control the direction of the vehicle. I dont deal in opinions. I deal in facts.
Having supplied parts for some road race cars. I can tell you it is an entrely different ball game. Low speed hard braking is the rule of the day for much of the race. Like in traffic on the street people pull out in front of you. You need to brakes hard to turn etc etc. In a rail or an altered there is no one in front of you , You have at least 1/8 mile to get stopped . (longer braking distance)the car is very light and the front tires are so tiny in most cases that to get them not to skid would be difficult at best. The amount of braking you would gain from a 2 inch wide tire and the extra weight you would carry make it not a gain. Since the track is designed for such vehicles in drag racing it works. Road racing as you well know is a different deal. Tires are huge both front and back and brakes there are more important sometimes than POWER. I had a incident where I had to brake hard with my rail last summer. Despite locking the rear wheels in my moment of panic rather than have the car change ends which is what happens with four wheel brakes in panic at high speed i was able to steer clear with no problem.
You are arguing about something not being right that is and has been done almost every week somewhere at some strip. There is no logic in that. Thousands of rails and altereds run all the time without front brakes and have for over 50 years.Then you tell me you dont have them on you g***er but wish you did. Then put them on! Be sure to send us the pics after it spins forteen times when you have to panic brake because you could no longer steer.
As for the bikes , You already gave the answer. They dont run them because IT IS SAFER without.
Anyway bang away fellows. I have thngs to do.
Don
And remember all you who are giving reason why you need them that are street and traffic related we are not talking about traffic situations here we are talking about drag racing. A specific application for a specific purose in a specific place and the reasons why.

 

Making up a scenario where the driver lacks sense and skill and then gets into an accident, then blaming the equipment is lame. Of course it is the way of the present generation; transfer the blame. On or off the race track.
I was taught when driving, whether with horses pulling a wagon, or an automobile, or an airplane;
First and foremost, know the limits of the equipment, then don’t do anything to exceed the limits of the equipment. I have been driving since I was seven, then when I was old enough I got my drivin-license in 1952. I have had two accidents (off the race track) worth noting. Neither involved skidding or inadequate equipment, were due to my inattention because I had my head up my *** and got distracted.
It’s amusing to hear about how somebody that hasn't even driven a car without front brakes weigh in on the subject, making up abstract **** about skidding out of control, % of application, etc. (Do you people actually drive at all?)
Of course if one is to build a ‘rod that way, he would then practice up on how to handle it, wouldn't he?.... Or is it impossible to wrap one's brain around such a concept?
I say, that if a driver locks up his brakes and then skids out of control, he’s been driving with limited skills and needs some practice. To throw every precaution to the wind, push the equipment beyond it’s limits, follow too close, etc. then place all of their faith in the brakes is lame-brained anyhow. The last thing I want is to be riding with that guy, or be the car in front of him even if he has MEGGA BRAKES, because he's the guy that's going to cause an accident, not me. Even on the race track, where the faster the car goes, the more important it is for the driver to be skilled and know the limits of hisself and his equipment.
That all said, let’s imagine just for a moment that some people are going to do that, in a panic lock up the brakes and keep them there. Then, of all situations imaginable, the last thing anybody that understands what’s happening would be to have the front wheels to be locked up because with them locked up ALL steering control is lost. That isn’t theory, it’s fact. That simple ****ysis only poses the obvious(again); It isn’t cars that don’t have front brakes are unsafe at all, but that some people simply lack the skills know the equipment and operate within those parameters, to drive safely. Absent (failure of a mechanical suspension component), cars don’t have accidents, people do.
I guess I could have kept this rant down to one sentence;
“If one don’t want to bother to learn to drive within the limits of his equipment, then don’t drive”.

 

I asked the Flying Spaghetti Monster and he agrees, front brakes are good.

NOW there is made up ****.