dohc v6 Posted March 19, 2004 Report Posted March 19, 2004 i want to know what to do for the upgrade to 11.25 and the back i think is 10.5. does anybody have a working e-brake. Quote
GutlessSupreme Posted March 19, 2004 Report Posted March 19, 2004 http://home.att.net/~aldridgec/TGP/brakes/rear_brake_upgrade.htm http://home.att.net/~aldridgec/TGP/brakes/rear_brake_upgrade.htm#Parking%20Brake Quote
GnatGoSplat Posted March 19, 2004 Report Posted March 19, 2004 11.25" front brakes needs a front knuckle replacement. Rear brake upgrade is documented on many sites including this one. Many people have made the park brake work by stretching and bending the existing cables. The pics I've seen, it doesn't look like it'll last long before snapping, but it CAN work. I never bothered on mine. Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 22, 2004 Author Report Posted March 22, 2004 the front all you need is the new caliper,rotor,pads. do i have to switch out the hub or the knuckle. Quote
supreme_style21 Posted March 22, 2004 Report Posted March 22, 2004 the front all you need is the new caliper,rotor,pads. do i have to switch out the hub or the knuckle. 11.25" front brakes needs a front knuckle replacement. Quote
Guest TurboSedan Posted March 22, 2004 Report Posted March 22, 2004 the front all you need is the new caliper,rotor,pads. do i have to switch out the hub or the knuckle. you can re-use your old calipers, but you'll need the new (bigger) rotors. i think the pads are the same but you should probably just replace them. joshua Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 22, 2004 Author Report Posted March 22, 2004 so for the front ifmyou get bigger rotors then if you dont have bigger pads it wont work probably that well. also will the bigger pads fit on the old calipers. Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 22, 2004 Author Report Posted March 22, 2004 for the rear all i need is new rotors calipers and pads. why would i have to replace the knuckle for the front or back Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 22, 2004 Author Report Posted March 22, 2004 i could not find 11 rear rotors for 95 monte. but i found front rotors. 11 15/64 and 11 1/4. has any body used 11 15/64 http://www.partsamerica.com/SelectParts.asp?SourceArea=&PartType=221&PTSet=A&Description=Brake+Drums+%26+Rotors&SourcePage=PartTypes&SearchFor=Disc%2FRotor Quote
Brandon Posted March 22, 2004 Report Posted March 22, 2004 I have a set of 11.25" front crossdrilled/slotted rotors and 11" rear crossdrilled/slotted rotors in the classifieds for sale. Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 22, 2004 Author Report Posted March 22, 2004 does the back brakes have the same mounting as the front. because then you can just use the front calipers and rotors on the back if not has anybody tried to use the front rotors in the back Quote
Guest TurboSedan Posted March 22, 2004 Report Posted March 22, 2004 for the rear all i need is new rotors calipers and pads. why would i have to replace the knuckle for the front or back you need '95+ strut/knuckle assemblies for the front brake upgrade because the caliper is mounted farther out to accomodate the bigger rotor. as far as i know, the calipers and pads are the same. i have not done the front brake upgrade yet; i have '96 Cutlass front strut/knuckles but i still need everything else. for the rears you need the new calipers, pads, new (bigger) rotors, caliper mounting brackets, and the matching (shorter) caliper mounting bracket bolts. the rear knuckles do not need to be changed. the big '94+ rear rotors are 11", there are no 11 & 1/4" or 11 & 15/64" rotors available. joshua Quote
Guest TurboSedan Posted March 22, 2004 Report Posted March 22, 2004 does the back brakes have the same mounting as the front. because then you can just use the front calipers and rotors on the back if not has anybody tried to use the front rotors in the back i haven't tried it, but i really doubt it would work. even if they did mount the same, the front rotor is vented and WAY thicker than the solid rear rotors. the '94+ rear brakes are probably more than sufficient. bigger rear rotors and/or vented rear rotors would probably just be overkill. upgrading the front brakes is probably alot more important than the rear since the front brakes do like 80% of the braking. the main reason to upgrade the rear brakes to the '94+ style is because the '88-'93 rear brakes suck ass - the calipers are notorious for seizing up, which makes the front brakes work much harder and will warp the front rotors. i didn't notice any braking improvement with the rear brake upgrade; they are simply more dependable and the pads are much much easier to change now. joshua Quote
GnatGoSplat Posted March 23, 2004 Report Posted March 23, 2004 It's NEVER, EVER a good idea to put front brakes in the rear. You will throw off braking balance badly. I once knew of some genius that tried this. I'm not sure how he did it, but he figured out some 80's GM car front brakes could be made to fit the rear. The car braked terrible, it was almost impossible for him not to lock up the rear. He tried an aftermarket brake proportioning valve, but it didn't help much. He ended up having to buy new rear knuckles (he hacked up the old ones) and converting back to stock rear brakes. I wouldn't waste time on that idea. Quote
dohc v6 Posted March 23, 2004 Author Report Posted March 23, 2004 so the only difference in the front is the strut assembely and the caliper mounting bracket. can i get these coil overs if i do the strut replace ment witha 95 +. http://heldmotorsports.com/mcfrontcoilovers.html Quote
Guest TurboSedan Posted March 23, 2004 Report Posted March 23, 2004 they should work fine. joshua Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.