They work fine as long as they're given regular attention. It's a simple matter during a tire rotation or snow tire switch to pop off the drum and adjust the star wheel a few teeth out so the drum lightly drags on the shoes. Do this regularly and the drums pull their fair share of the braking.
Rear drum brakes.
- Thread starter stchman
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
374K, still on the factory shoes.
I've had perfectly adjusted shoes just not work worth a hill of beans. Glazed over or something. New, cheap shoes (wearever silver,
I replace at the decade mark, mileage be darned, if I have a hint of low performance, like an e-brake that won't swing the end around.
374K, still on the factory shoes.
I've had perfectly adjusted shoes just not work worth a hill of beans. Glazed over or something. New, cheap shoes (wearever silver,
I replace at the decade mark, mileage be darned, if I have a hint of low performance, like an e-brake that won't swing the end around.
Originally Posted By: Chris142
Originally Posted By: Miller88
We know the real reason.
They are significantly cheaper.
I have heard that before. But how? How can a backing plate,shoes,springs and labor to put it all together be cheaper than a disc brake setup?
The cost savings has to be significantly smaller on the level at which Toyota is buying them, but at a consumer level, it's much cheaper to buy all rear drum parts from, say, rockauto than it is all disc brake parts.
Of course, economies of scale, save $20 a vehicle and that adds up. Why does Honda still use a timing belt on the J35? It's slightly cheaper than outfitting the engine with a chain.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
We know the real reason.
They are significantly cheaper.
I have heard that before. But how? How can a backing plate,shoes,springs and labor to put it all together be cheaper than a disc brake setup?
The cost savings has to be significantly smaller on the level at which Toyota is buying them, but at a consumer level, it's much cheaper to buy all rear drum parts from, say, rockauto than it is all disc brake parts.
Of course, economies of scale, save $20 a vehicle and that adds up. Why does Honda still use a timing belt on the J35? It's slightly cheaper than outfitting the engine with a chain.
Originally Posted By: qdeezie
Rear drum brakes should be outlawed. I hate them. And that's me being nice about it.
I know several car guys who hate rear disks, after doing a "simple" rear disk brake job and ruining a caliper or two because they didn't understand the wind-back feature (dictated by the need for the parking brake).
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Of course, economies of scale, save $20 a vehicle and that adds up. Why does Honda still use a timing belt on the J35? It's slightly cheaper than outfitting the engine with a chain.
There's much more to it than that. For one thing, it's a cheap/easy job, especially if you have an impact wrench to take off the crank bolt. If you really think you love chain driven engines, try to change the water pump on a Ford 3.5L V6. I'll do my J35 WP and you do the Ford... and I'll give you an hour head start.
Belts are quieter. Since they need no lubrication, casting and packaging issues are better. Inspection is easier/cheaper. Take a look at the valvetrain. The J35 engine designers obviously did not shy away from complexity. There are good reasons to use belts and it's not like J35's suffer from premature belt failures.
You've repeated this anti-belt rant as if you have some kind of point, but you don't. I suppose you resent a multi-hundred dollar scheduled maintenance. Perhaps you yearn for the days on OHV engines when it seemed like chain drives lasted forever. I would, except they didn't. At least, not for me. The nylon gear on my 351W broke down (as they always do) and I had to get a tow and replace it. My Fiero didn't even have a chain or a belt, but it broke down at 86K miles and I had to get a tow, and I replaced the broken Phenolic Resin Composite gearwheel.
Go to Reddit justrolledintoshop and see the horror pictures of chain drive DOHC service, lots of VAG and Mercedes owners [censored] about big shop time hours, and even ones with chains in the back against the firewall (again, Ford. Thank you, Ford, may I have another?).
For me, I'll take the performance and economy of an all-aluminum 4VPC engine with the simplicity of changing the belt myself. It's no harder and only a little more work than replacing a water pump on an old OHV V-8, something I've had to do many times.
Rear drum brakes should be outlawed. I hate them. And that's me being nice about it.
I know several car guys who hate rear disks, after doing a "simple" rear disk brake job and ruining a caliper or two because they didn't understand the wind-back feature (dictated by the need for the parking brake).
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Of course, economies of scale, save $20 a vehicle and that adds up. Why does Honda still use a timing belt on the J35? It's slightly cheaper than outfitting the engine with a chain.
There's much more to it than that. For one thing, it's a cheap/easy job, especially if you have an impact wrench to take off the crank bolt. If you really think you love chain driven engines, try to change the water pump on a Ford 3.5L V6. I'll do my J35 WP and you do the Ford... and I'll give you an hour head start.
Belts are quieter. Since they need no lubrication, casting and packaging issues are better. Inspection is easier/cheaper. Take a look at the valvetrain. The J35 engine designers obviously did not shy away from complexity. There are good reasons to use belts and it's not like J35's suffer from premature belt failures.
You've repeated this anti-belt rant as if you have some kind of point, but you don't. I suppose you resent a multi-hundred dollar scheduled maintenance. Perhaps you yearn for the days on OHV engines when it seemed like chain drives lasted forever. I would, except they didn't. At least, not for me. The nylon gear on my 351W broke down (as they always do) and I had to get a tow and replace it. My Fiero didn't even have a chain or a belt, but it broke down at 86K miles and I had to get a tow, and I replaced the broken Phenolic Resin Composite gearwheel.
Go to Reddit justrolledintoshop and see the horror pictures of chain drive DOHC service, lots of VAG and Mercedes owners [censored] about big shop time hours, and even ones with chains in the back against the firewall (again, Ford. Thank you, Ford, may I have another?).
For me, I'll take the performance and economy of an all-aluminum 4VPC engine with the simplicity of changing the belt myself. It's no harder and only a little more work than replacing a water pump on an old OHV V-8, something I've had to do many times.
^^^ Car makers can't just slap a chain on in place of a belt just for cost reasons. I have heard this explained by the Lead engineer for a number of manufacturers in various interviews and some designs are easier to do a chain vs belt and you can't just substitute so easily.
I hate timing belts, especially where a broken belt means a broken engine. The fact that some seem designed to be impossible to change (I owned one) is another factor.
Having seen timing chains wind up half a million miles...gimme a chain or gears!
Having seen timing chains wind up half a million miles...gimme a chain or gears!
Originally Posted By: qdeezie
Rear drum brakes should be outlawed. I hate them. And that's me being nice about it.
Outlaw, other than "just cause", can you provide any sound reasons? I guess your 1990 F150 XLT should be "outlawed" as it has rear drum brakes.
Rear drum brakes should be outlawed. I hate them. And that's me being nice about it.
Outlaw, other than "just cause", can you provide any sound reasons? I guess your 1990 F150 XLT should be "outlawed" as it has rear drum brakes.
Technology and lubrication have caught up with making chains last a long time.
I remember the XK Jaguars landing their owners with big bills for replacement timing chains, I can't remembr too many chain driven ohc engines from back in the day.
Belts became popular in Europe because the were quieter than chains, and when most cars were rwd relatively easy to change. Most mainstream fwd cars of the '80s were a fairly easy cambelt replacement job too. The popularisation of A/C and power steering and ever more crowded engine bays made cambelt changing much more time consuming. Many of the cars I work on need engine mounts removed along with inaccessible covers, making for a time consuming job. The better materials and lubrication of modern engines means timing chains wear much more slowly, deleting a chore from modern car maintenance.
Drum brakes are often all that is required on the back of most fwd cars, abs can work with them too. All else being equal discs are less prone to fade, and deal better with a water soaking, and easier to maintain. Drums last longer and cost less to maintain in the long run, but require wheel removal to check properly.
Claud.
I remember the XK Jaguars landing their owners with big bills for replacement timing chains, I can't remembr too many chain driven ohc engines from back in the day.
Belts became popular in Europe because the were quieter than chains, and when most cars were rwd relatively easy to change. Most mainstream fwd cars of the '80s were a fairly easy cambelt replacement job too. The popularisation of A/C and power steering and ever more crowded engine bays made cambelt changing much more time consuming. Many of the cars I work on need engine mounts removed along with inaccessible covers, making for a time consuming job. The better materials and lubrication of modern engines means timing chains wear much more slowly, deleting a chore from modern car maintenance.
Drum brakes are often all that is required on the back of most fwd cars, abs can work with them too. All else being equal discs are less prone to fade, and deal better with a water soaking, and easier to maintain. Drums last longer and cost less to maintain in the long run, but require wheel removal to check properly.
Claud.
As far as timing chain vs. timing belt, I have never had a timing chain go bad.
The only timing belt vehicle I have ever owned was my 1989 Isuzu pickup with a 2.3L OHC engine.
Isuzu recommended changing the timing belt every 60K miles, I did because the engine was an interference engine so a timing belt breaking would have resulted in LOTS of damage.
Since the pickup was RWD, there was plenty of room under the hood to change the belt.
Most of the vehicles I have owned have had GM pushrod engines (V8 and V6). Pushrod engines have a really short timing chain and therefore less likelihood of stretching and going bad.
The only timing belt vehicle I have ever owned was my 1989 Isuzu pickup with a 2.3L OHC engine.
Isuzu recommended changing the timing belt every 60K miles, I did because the engine was an interference engine so a timing belt breaking would have resulted in LOTS of damage.
Since the pickup was RWD, there was plenty of room under the hood to change the belt.
Most of the vehicles I have owned have had GM pushrod engines (V8 and V6). Pushrod engines have a really short timing chain and therefore less likelihood of stretching and going bad.
Originally Posted By: Claud
Technology and lubrication have caught up with making chains last a long time.
Ford and VAG are challenging your assumptions. Well, timing chains may be OK, but gears and tension adjusters are taking out cars.
http://www.reesphotos.com/vw/
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=95765
OK, I'll admit that horror stories about on both belts and chains. That's why it's silly to have a vendetta against one or the other. Buy what you like, easy to service or let somebody else do it, but the issue is not belts or chains, the real issues are reliable versus unreliable, easy to service versus hard to service.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/2i4h9a
https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintot...rchased_from_a/
Technology and lubrication have caught up with making chains last a long time.
Ford and VAG are challenging your assumptions. Well, timing chains may be OK, but gears and tension adjusters are taking out cars.
http://www.reesphotos.com/vw/
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=95765
OK, I'll admit that horror stories about on both belts and chains. That's why it's silly to have a vendetta against one or the other. Buy what you like, easy to service or let somebody else do it, but the issue is not belts or chains, the real issues are reliable versus unreliable, easy to service versus hard to service.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintotheshop/comments/2i4h9a
https://www.reddit.com/r/Justrolledintot...rchased_from_a/
To me, it seems a bit crazy to have something so critical (cam on an interference engine) driven by something that has a finite life. You *know* a belt is going to snap. Chains - more often than not- last the life of the engine.
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
I understand there are a lot of DIY'ers here, I am one as well. If I owned an engine with a timing belt, I would be the one to change it. I would also be worrying once I got near the change interval that it would break, too. They have a habit of snapping or breaking a pulley once the change interval is near.
At least some are now pushing 150K mile replacements (oil bathed). I like that a bit better as most vehicles up here rust out before 150K
What about someone who is not a DIY'er and may not be that well off. Do you think they can pony up the $1000 to have a shop change the timing belt? Or what about on cases like the Aveo ... I have a friend in a similar situation - won't change the belt on his accord because he doesn't have $1000 to have a shop change it.
The good news is - most engines no longer use timing belts. I believe it's a result of trying to lower overall maintenance costs.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
I understand there are a lot of DIY'ers here, I am one as well. If I owned an engine with a timing belt, I would be the one to change it. I would also be worrying once I got near the change interval that it would break, too. They have a habit of snapping or breaking a pulley once the change interval is near.
At least some are now pushing 150K mile replacements (oil bathed). I like that a bit better as most vehicles up here rust out before 150K
What about someone who is not a DIY'er and may not be that well off. Do you think they can pony up the $1000 to have a shop change the timing belt? Or what about on cases like the Aveo ... I have a friend in a similar situation - won't change the belt on his accord because he doesn't have $1000 to have a shop change it.
The good news is - most engines no longer use timing belts. I believe it's a result of trying to lower overall maintenance costs.
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: Claud
Technology and lubrication have caught up with making chains last a long time.
Ford and VAG are challenging your assumptions. Well, timing chains may be OK, but gears and tension adjusters are taking out cars.
http://www.reesphotos.com/vw/
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=95765
OK, I'll admit that horror stories about on both belts and chains. That's why it's silly to have a vendetta against one or the other. Buy what you like, easy to service or let somebody else do it, but the issue is not belts or chains, the real issues are reliable versus unreliable, easy to service versus hard to service.
Reliable and easy to maintain often go hand in hand. If changing a belt was a half hour job using ordinary hand tools then (almost) everyone would change them or have a shop do it for modest charges. If all chains lasted forever there would be nothing to discuss.
But this isn't the case. Modern cars are ever more difficult to work on, resulting in skimped maintenance or big bills from your repair shop.
Volkswagen gained their reputation by offering simple cars well put together by the standards of the day. The very simplicity of the car helped, the cooling system's only moving parts were a fan coupled to the generator driven by a belt. Changing a clutch was an hours job for a mechanic who could walk and chew gum simultaneously. But now the are very complex machines, and a fault with a minor part of the engine might result in bill more than the car is worth.
So I heartily agree with you, maybe this underlines why the Far Eastern automakers have taken hold of much of the American car market.
Maybe it helped that the Japanese makers understood the American way of neglecting maintenance (By UK standars Imean, and it's a generalisation, not a dig at members of this forum who probably have a much more enlightened view of maintenance), The Brits were much more likely to be weekend tinkerers, relishing getting underneath their MG's and Austins every weekend "To keep the old girl going".
Claud.
Originally Posted By: Claud
Technology and lubrication have caught up with making chains last a long time.
Ford and VAG are challenging your assumptions. Well, timing chains may be OK, but gears and tension adjusters are taking out cars.
http://www.reesphotos.com/vw/
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=95765
OK, I'll admit that horror stories about on both belts and chains. That's why it's silly to have a vendetta against one or the other. Buy what you like, easy to service or let somebody else do it, but the issue is not belts or chains, the real issues are reliable versus unreliable, easy to service versus hard to service.
Reliable and easy to maintain often go hand in hand. If changing a belt was a half hour job using ordinary hand tools then (almost) everyone would change them or have a shop do it for modest charges. If all chains lasted forever there would be nothing to discuss.
But this isn't the case. Modern cars are ever more difficult to work on, resulting in skimped maintenance or big bills from your repair shop.
Volkswagen gained their reputation by offering simple cars well put together by the standards of the day. The very simplicity of the car helped, the cooling system's only moving parts were a fan coupled to the generator driven by a belt. Changing a clutch was an hours job for a mechanic who could walk and chew gum simultaneously. But now the are very complex machines, and a fault with a minor part of the engine might result in bill more than the car is worth.
So I heartily agree with you, maybe this underlines why the Far Eastern automakers have taken hold of much of the American car market.
Maybe it helped that the Japanese makers understood the American way of neglecting maintenance (By UK standars Imean, and it's a generalisation, not a dig at members of this forum who probably have a much more enlightened view of maintenance), The Brits were much more likely to be weekend tinkerers, relishing getting underneath their MG's and Austins every weekend "To keep the old girl going".
Claud.
I will not own a car with a timing belt as the cost to change (I don't do those sort of jobs myself)is too much for me to accept as expected maintenance. Tires and brakes are enough cost as it is
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
I understand there are a lot of DIY'ers here, I am one as well. If I owned an engine with a timing belt, I would be the one to change it. I would also be worrying once I got near the change interval that it would break, too. They have a habit of snapping or breaking a pulley once the change interval is near.
At least some are now pushing 150K mile replacements (oil bathed). I like that a bit better as most vehicles up here rust out before 150K
What about someone who is not a DIY'er and may not be that well off. Do you think they can pony up the $1000 to have a shop change the timing belt? Or what about on cases like the Aveo ... I have a friend in a similar situation - won't change the belt on his accord because he doesn't have $1000 to have a shop change it.
The good news is - most engines no longer use timing belts. I believe it's a result of trying to lower overall maintenance costs.
Oh bologna!
A habit of breaking a pulley when the change interval is near? Bunk!
An oil bathed timing belt? News to me... I've seen a few in the aftermarket for performance V8 applications, but never one OE. There are and have been many manufacturers doing 120k+ service intervals though.
A grand to change a t-belt on an Accord? Seems high. How much extra maintenance is being suggested?
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I am not convinced, nor will I ever be convinced, that a belt is ever a better solution than a chain for driving a camshaft.
Luckily you don't have to be convinced for manufacturers to keep making great motors.
I understand there are a lot of DIY'ers here, I am one as well. If I owned an engine with a timing belt, I would be the one to change it. I would also be worrying once I got near the change interval that it would break, too. They have a habit of snapping or breaking a pulley once the change interval is near.
At least some are now pushing 150K mile replacements (oil bathed). I like that a bit better as most vehicles up here rust out before 150K
What about someone who is not a DIY'er and may not be that well off. Do you think they can pony up the $1000 to have a shop change the timing belt? Or what about on cases like the Aveo ... I have a friend in a similar situation - won't change the belt on his accord because he doesn't have $1000 to have a shop change it.
The good news is - most engines no longer use timing belts. I believe it's a result of trying to lower overall maintenance costs.
Oh bologna!
A habit of breaking a pulley when the change interval is near? Bunk!
An oil bathed timing belt? News to me... I've seen a few in the aftermarket for performance V8 applications, but never one OE. There are and have been many manufacturers doing 120k+ service intervals though.
A grand to change a t-belt on an Accord? Seems high. How much extra maintenance is being suggested?
Don't fully understand how we got to and the relationship between drum/disc to belt/chain, but I have an observation. If you are going to keep your car for a decade and compare cost of ownership of a belt vs reliable chain (not all are) you can add about $2K more to the cost of the belt timing car. You could pay $2K more for the timing chain car and break fairly even if you don't do the job yourself.
Drum brakes have the advantage of being mostly enclosed, and have better and less complex parking brakes. I assume GM went back to rear drums on their pickups for better parking brake performance, especially when trailers are connected and the truck is loaded.
My 2001 Accord LX has 275K on the original rear shoes. Other than a periodic cleaning, lubing and adjustment, they have been trouble free. It appears the rear brakes do light work on this car, if I lived in the mountains, I'd want discs.
Drum brakes have the advantage of being mostly enclosed, and have better and less complex parking brakes. I assume GM went back to rear drums on their pickups for better parking brake performance, especially when trailers are connected and the truck is loaded.
My 2001 Accord LX has 275K on the original rear shoes. Other than a periodic cleaning, lubing and adjustment, they have been trouble free. It appears the rear brakes do light work on this car, if I lived in the mountains, I'd want discs.
I heartily agree with anyone who chooses not to own a belt driven engine. It's your money and choice, after all. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.
But trying to push the idea of superiority, I have to argue with that a bit. I have no ego on the line- I own two chain driven and one belt driven vehicle, all over 100K miles, and all have given me zero problems with the chain or belt.
There is an automobile industry term for consumers that refuse to buy vehicles with loaded long term maintenance costs- non-customers. They are either trying to make one vehicle last forever (that is, well past the warranty period), or only buy used vehicles. Since they affect neither warranty liability nor new vehicle sales, either way, they are not relevant to the new car design and specification process. (This is a long-winded way of saying that car manufacturers have economically driven reasons not to care about your belt vs. chain opinions).
As for GM moving back to drums- There are two reasons US car companies move forward in technology- competition and regulation (safety, emissions). There are two reasons to move backwards- production cost and warranty cost.
But trying to push the idea of superiority, I have to argue with that a bit. I have no ego on the line- I own two chain driven and one belt driven vehicle, all over 100K miles, and all have given me zero problems with the chain or belt.
There is an automobile industry term for consumers that refuse to buy vehicles with loaded long term maintenance costs- non-customers. They are either trying to make one vehicle last forever (that is, well past the warranty period), or only buy used vehicles. Since they affect neither warranty liability nor new vehicle sales, either way, they are not relevant to the new car design and specification process. (This is a long-winded way of saying that car manufacturers have economically driven reasons not to care about your belt vs. chain opinions).
As for GM moving back to drums- There are two reasons US car companies move forward in technology- competition and regulation (safety, emissions). There are two reasons to move backwards- production cost and warranty cost.
I usually have to replace the drum shoes before 100K miles, but just remember to use the short shoe on the front and have both drums off at the same time to use the other side for a reference. Don't worry about taking the whole thing apart like I have seen people do just to get the core at the time of buying the relined shoes. You are destined to screw it up if you do, because you'll never remember where the springs go and the adjusters are specific for each side. They are LH and RH thread.
- Status
