Largest/Best 4-lug brake combo?

[Pat]

Looking for ideas for brake upgrades while still keeping the 4 lug set up on my Rampage. Any and all ideas welcome.

Thanks!

Pat

[84omni]

We put 84-85 van brakes on the front of my brothers horizon they are 10" vented and 4 lug.

[GLHS0769]

83 and 84 Shelby Chargers were 4 lug. They had the 2 pin "heavy duty" Aires/Reliant brakes. I believe 84 turbo G bodies also had those brakes.
And both the SC and the G body would have the 200mm rear drum 4 lug brakes.

[cordes]

83 and 84 Shelby Chargers were 4 lug. They had the 2 pin "heavy duty" Aires/Reliant brakes. I believe 84 turbo G bodies also had those brakes.
And both the SC and the G body would have the 200mm rear drum 4 lug brakes.

What was the bearing diameter on those SCs? I recall reading that the SCs, GLH, and GLHT used the same diameter bearing as the K based cars. If that's the case, then you should be able to use the 4 lug SC/GLHT bearings in every K based knuckle through at least 89 which will give you 4 lug hubs with 11" capability.

Of course that assumes that what I've read about the GLH bearing size is indeed true.

[Vigo]

I think the Van brakes are a good idea. I once adapted van rear drums to a car axles (which uses the same axle as the Rampage). They have large rear drums so i'd consider using the rears too. You either have to slot or redrill the 4 mounting holed on the stub axle and the backing plate to it the car axle. Keep in mind they have more depth than car brakes so they increase track width.

Or you could redrill any k-car brakes to 4 lug.

[Pat]

What was the bearing diameter on those SCs? I recall reading that the SCs, GLH, and GLHT used the same diameter bearing as the K based cars. If that's the case, then you should be able to use the 4 lug SC/GLHT bearings in every K based knuckle through at least 89 which will give you 4 lug hubs with 11" capability.

Of course that assumes that what I've read about the GLH bearing size is indeed true.


With what rotor though? I can press an '84 k based bearing and hub into an '89 knuckle for 11" capability, but I don't know of a 4 hole 11" rotor that would be compatible.

[cordes]

With what rotor though? I can press an '84 k based bearing and hub into an '89 knuckle for 11" capability, but I don't know of a 4 hole 11" rotor that would be compatible.

Good question. I don't know of anything off hand. I suppose if you can't find anything that'll fit you could redrill the 5 lug pieces. I've read of people doing that, but I haven't tried it myself.

[cordes]

ETA: Since the friction of the wheel to rotor face to hub is what keeps everything in place I wouldn't hesitate to redrill a set of rotors.

[Pat]

Redrilling makes me nervous given that I'd like to be able to use the car for track days.

[Pat]

Does anyone know if the rear hubs are the same from an L body to a K body?

[83scamp]

I upgraded the front brakes on my Scamp with 84 HD K-car brakes. It's a pure bolt on, and give you 10 1/4" vented rotors. The calipers with mounting brackets are available from Rock Auto, as are the rotors and pads. You can reuse your existing brake lines. Made a big difference in stopping ability on my Scamp.

[Pat]

I upgraded the front brakes on my Scamp with 84 HD K-car brakes. It's a pure bolt on, and give you 10 1/4" vented rotors. The calipers with mounting brackets are available from Rock Auto, as are the rotors and pads. You can reuse your existing brake lines. Made a big difference in stopping ability on my Scamp.

Was a straight bolt on to the L body knuckles? Awesome.

[Pat]

another question...is the standard L body knuckle the same as the GLH/Shelby Charger knuckle? The wheel bearings for the GLH/Shelby models are the same as the K based. I'd prefer to run the larger wheel bearings but can't tell from the part numbers/drawings I've seen if the knuckle itself is any different.

Thanks,
Pat

[83scamp]

another question...is the standard L body knuckle the same as the GLH/Shelby Charger knuckle? The wheel bearings for the GLH/Shelby models are the same as the K based. I'd prefer to run the larger wheel bearings but can't tell from the part numbers/drawings I've seen if the knuckle itself is any different.

Thanks,
Pat


I'm writing this from memory, but I believe all front hubs are the same through 84. In 85, Chrysler updated all of the non l-body platforms to a larger hub and bearing assembly. I believe that the Shelby Chargers were updated to the larger hubs as well due to the "performance" nature of the car. This is why the 84 K-car brakes fit the standard L-body's without modification.

[Jetmugg]

Just curious - why not upgrade to 5-lug goodies? You could use the post-'91 K-car knuckles, which have improved geometry, and the benefit of bolt-in bearing carriers.

Steve.

[Pat]

Just curious - why not upgrade to 5-lug goodies? You could use the post-'91 K-car knuckles, which have improved geometry, and the benefit of bolt-in bearing carriers.

Steve.

That is by far my preference, but I don't think I can do it and buy the wheels I'll need for the autox rubber I want to run and stay in a GRM budget. I scored a ridiculously cheap 4x100 wheel set in the right size from a Honda. Trying to find a work around.

[Vigo]

I've got redrilled rotors in the back of my aries and never had a problem with it.

I wonder if 83 scamp might know this: I found smaller ball joints on my 82 lebaron when i was swapping from 4 lug to 5 lug. Ive never seen those smaller ball joints before, and ive swapped 84s and 85s to 5lug. So somewhere there is a point where spindles with the old, smaller ball joint are not useful to you unless you drill the ball joint hole out.

[francois]

Don't worry about a redrill rotor. They've been running for a while on Civic using ITR-Crv's calipers and a redrill rotor to fit their 4 lugs. I have use redrill rotor previously and I've been on the track with the car so no worries there.

The GLH knuckle is different then the regular 4 lugs L-body which in turn is different then a K-body one.
I don't remember if it's the OD and the depth of the bearing that differ from a plain jane vs a GLH/Shelby L-body.

[Pat]

Don't worry about a redrill rotor. They've been running for a while on Civic using ITR-Crv's calipers and a redrill rotor to fit their 4 lugs. I have use redrill rotor previously and I've been on the track with the car so no worries there.

The GLH knuckle is different then the regular 4 lugs L-body which in turn is different then a K-body one.
I don't remember if it's the OD and the depth of the bearing that differ from a plain jane vs a GLH/Shelby L-body.

So, to use an redrilled 4 lug 11" rotor on a later '91+ knuckle, I'd also have to either redrill the hub flange for 4 lugs...unless I could press out the actual bearing from the later bolt on hub and reassemble with a 4 lug flange. Hhhmmm...

[83scamp]

I've got redrilled rotors in the back of my aries and never had a problem with it.

I wonder if 83 scamp might know this: I found smaller ball joints on my 82 lebaron when i was swapping from 4 lug to 5 lug. Ive never seen those smaller ball joints before, and ive swapped 84s and 85s to 5lug. So somewhere there is a point where spindles with the old, smaller ball joint are not useful to you unless you drill the ball joint hole out.

OK, I looked on Rock Auto to compare part numbers. It looks like in 83, Chrysler updated the ball joint. Your 82 uses the same ball joint as the L-body.

[Vigo]

Ok, gotcha.

Pat, you probably COULD press the hub out of a 91-up bolt-in bearing and put the 4 lug hub in it, but if you have easier access to the 89 stuff it seems like a safer bet. Besides, once you have to re-press the hub to replace the bolt-in bearing, there's no advantage to a bolt-in bearing anymore. I think the best thing the 91-up stuff has going for it is it's easy to get a hold of..

[cordes]

Ok, gotcha.

Pat, you probably COULD press the hub out of a 91-up bolt-in bearing and put the 4 lug hub in it, but if you have easier access to the 89 stuff it seems like a safer bet. Besides, once you have to re-press the hub to replace the bolt-in bearing, there's no advantage to a bolt-in bearing anymore. I think the best thing the 91-up stuff has going for it is it's easy to get a hold of..

It does help with geometry some since it pushes the ball joint down a bit.

[Pat]

It does help with geometry some since it pushes the ball joint down a bit.

Which I would like to do...

[Vigo]

Go over to TD and search posts from user Bayley. He relocated the inner control arm mounting points to improve roll center on a lowered lemons car. He claims very good results. If you're concerned about roll center you may be interested in that.

[bamman]

Here is what I learned about the L body 4 Lug brake upgrade, seeing as I just did this to my Omni. Overall, you'll be upgrading to the 1984-5 Caravan setup. The hardest part is locating the minivan caliper brackets. You will need the caliper brackets from the 84-90 Minivan, part numbers 4313256 and 4313257. When you have located these, the rest is easy. You'll need:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004JPFOIA
4 Lug Rotors from 84-85 Caravan--I used Brembo 4313594 / W0133-1673555 / 27060 (those are all valid part numbers) These are actually OEM Mopar units that aren't made anymore, however, they can still be purchased. Furthermore, they are made in the USA, which shows how old they are because the USA doesn't make rotors anymore. Expect getting boxes with much shelf wear and possibly some surface rust.

http://www.tirerack.com/brakes/brakes.jsp?make=ATE&model=PremiumOne+Pads&group=PremiumOne+Pads&partNum=AT259&autoMake=Dodge&autoModel=Caravan&autoYear=1984&autoModClar=14+Inch+OE
Minivan brake pads. I bought these ceramic ones from Tire Rack on clearance.

A 24mm master cylinder is also required. Also make sure you get the minivan 60mm caliper. It is larger than the bolt on 54mm calipers that doesn't require the aforementioned caliper brackets.

As for keeping the rears 4 lug and having the best brakes, you'll have to upgrade from the 200mm drums to the 220mm drums. I haven't done this personally and probably will not.

I have seen some people upgrade to a rear disc setup by upgrading only the rear's to 5 lug. This is because the rear hubs should be the same across all vehicle lines.

[Vigo]

To do the 220mm drum upgrade all you need is the backing plates from 5lug 220mm drum car (MUUUUUCH easier to find than the 4 lug 220s) and the 4 lug drums from a parts store or rock auto.

[Pat]

To do the 220mm drum upgrade all you need is the backing plates from 5lug 220mm drum car (MUUUUUCH easier to find than the 4 lug 220s) and the 4 lug drums from a parts store or rock auto.

Thanks to everyone for your help and suggestions...I'm making a lot of planning progress from this!

Adam..what you listed above is almost exactly my current plan for the rear. I know of a buddy locally that has a parts car with 220 rear drums on it. if I can use the backing plate, hardware, etc off that car, the current hub/spindle from the Rampage and just pick up a cheap drum, that's easy to do. Should work out great.

On the fronts, I'm actually likely going with the 10.25" set up off the '84 cars. Given the weight I plan on being at, I'm sure that will be plenty of braking power, parts are plentiful and the rotors alone are 3 lbs lighter than the 11" rotors. They also already are a factory match to the 220 drums out back, which means I can use the factory master cylinder for that car. For the proportioning valve, I'm thinking about ditching the factory prop valve completely and running an adjustable proportioning valve/distribution block with separate front and rear circuits. Given the weight distribution of a Rampage, I'm thinking a high level of front/rear bias adjustability will be an asset. If I wanted to get crazy, I could even mount the prop valve in the car to easy make tweaks between autocross runs.

What do you guys think? Please poke holes in my plan...

[Vigo]

I think the in-cab prop valve is a good idea. I know you're PROBABLY not planning on doing much road course work but there's a reason a lot of those cars put it right next to the driver and i dont think there are any real safety issues if it's done well.. tight fittings and not touching your exhaust, etc. :p Also, i think the 220mm rear drums are probably a lot stronger than people give them credit for because noone i know of has cranked the pressure to them.

[83scamp]

I think the in-cab prop valve is a good idea. I know you're PROBABLY not planning on doing much road course work but there's a reason a lot of those cars put it right next to the driver and i dont think there are any real safety issues if it's done well.. tight fittings and not touching your exhaust, etc. :p Also, i think the 220mm rear drums are probably a lot stronger than people give them credit for because noone i know of has cranked the pressure to them.

And, on an L-body pickup, there isn't any need to. There is NO weight in the back of one of these. If you remove the factory load sensing prop valve, you can probably lock the rears at will with the 200mm drums...

[cordes]

Do ultra light rampages even need rear brakes?

[Pat]

I am sure some will help...at the speeds I am planning on running. :-)

[capev86]

It looks like in 83, Chrysler updated the ball joint. Your 82 uses the same ball joint as the L-body.

that's nice to know since i may be picking up an 81 k wagon in a few days and i most definitely want to upgrade to 5 lug with bigger brakes!