Yet another Tacoma brake upgrade to Tundra

Whew. That was exhausting! But they’re on. I didn’t have the issues with the banjo bolts being too long... maybe they’ve resolved it? Or maybe I was lucky for a change. I feel like I had to crank down a lot harder than normal to get these copper washers to stop leaking though. Wish I’d seen your post while I was at oreilys getting those hexagonal open tip wrenches; dang near stripped those old fittings out!

I definitely see what people meant by the brakes feeling soft on the upper end. Is there anything I can do to fix that? Or should I just get used to it and enjoy that impressive braking power when pressing more than halfway down the pedal stroke?

 

Give it some time. Mine firmed up quite nice. Pretty much back to normal now. Did you bed them in properly? I did mine twice, as it was suggested that sometimes it may take a second bed in to really get them to bed in properly, and it definitely seemed to help. I also got all new rears and adjusted the proportioning valve to the max, then tested lock up on dirt road. Even after that it still took a few more drive cycles for them to firm up even more, or so it seems. My brakes are freaking awesome now and pedal feels great.

 

Try adding in a little more rear brake by adjusting the BPV arm up a little bit. I found that it improved that initial, light touch, braking feel on mine.

 

Haven't had a chance to bed them in completely. Was just in my neighborhood and didn't want to go fast enough to do it last night. Then dropped the truck off for some frame welding this morning. Will definitely make sure to do that completely when I get it back tomorrow! Haven't lost any brake fluid so far!

The hard to flexible brake line fittings were a total PITA!




Now I just need some new tires...

 

Could the added stopping power be throwing off the brake proportioning valve? How would I "adjust" it? I'm not sure how I'd test that device, but now that I know what that tangle of brake lines is for, I'm tempted to remove it and do the manual adjuster bypass. All those extra brake lines and fittings just seem like a disaster waiting to happen, and since it links front and rear, it could cause catastrophic failure. Seems like a poor design. Kinda want to go through and replace all the hard brake lines now... lol

 

Its very easy to adjust the proportioning valve arm. Its the threaded rod with an adjustable nut and a lock nut... Here's a thread about it(linked it to my post but be sure to read the rest).
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/rear-axle-displacement-brake-sensor-thingy.524233/#post-17092831
Btw, did you include bleeding the proportioning valve, along with the rest?

 

Thanks! This is a very informative link! I hadn’t even thought about it; any of it. Until today I never even considered that the rear brakes would be affected by the height. The truck came with an old lift with OME so, originally about 2.5” but has settled out quite a bit over the last ten years, I’d assume. I’m going to have to check on this, for sure.

The more I think about it though, the more I dislike it. Suspension will sag over time and even if corrected using a bracket and adjusting it, why not just have a manual override instead? Seems like by adjusting the valve, I’d be doing the same thing as having an override, except that I’d then eliminate the issue of it changing without my permission and the danger of it failing and causing the whole braking system to go out with it.

And no, I definitely didn’t bleed the valve. I had assumed that it was some sort of fluid distribution block and didn’t look at it any more closely. I will tomorrow though! Wouldn’t bleeding the rear brakes automatically bleed the LSPV? Since the fluid would go through there.

 

I have this on my list of improvements and had a question regarding pedal height/feel. Does anyone know if there is a difference in pedal height/feel between ABS and Non ABS? Thanks

 

Hey @zbadboy get your ass over on the AZBS tread. Lots of shenanigans and assholeries like back in the Corps exept over the internet.

 

Well, the brakes have definitely firmed up nicely just through normal use. The stopping power is awesome. I have to say, this was an excellent upgrade for safety. With 33s and all the extra weight of bumpers and stuff, it could get sketchy zooming down the canyons with traffic. All better now!

 

So, I'm looking into upgrading from my 16" steel wheels to some 17" aluminum to cut down on weight and tire costs, also maybe for a little more style... I'm not sure what specifications I need to look for to ensure that the new wheels will clear the Tundra brakes. I suppose I don't fully understand the measurements/terminology on wheels... offset, backspacing, hub-centric, and then there's also that number that I'm guessing denotes the wheel diameter where the bead sits (think 17x8.5 with 8.5 being the number I don't understand). Anyone have any clarifying thoughts on this or links to threads this is discussed? Right now I have 255/85/R16 tires on, and I'd like to go with something a little wider across the tread area. The truck currently has an OME lift that I'm going to redo soon.

 

I went from factory aluminum 16" to Tundra aluminum 17" and gained 2.5 lbs per rim. tire price won't change much either if you keep the same diameter

depending on how much the steel ones weigh you may break even or save only a little

 

17s are not going to be any cheaper that 16s. In fact, usually more expensive.

All wheel widths are measured from inside lip to inside lip. The 8.5 number is that measurement.

 

To get the same 33" ish tire I have, the 17 version has always been like 30-60$ cheaper since it's an inch less rubber. Not a big difference but with two tire changes the wheels will pay for themselves it's my version of rationalizing! Haha

What DOES that 8.5 indicate then?

 

8.5 is the rim width, the part where the tire bead sits.



your 255/85-16 is 255/80-17. https://www.tacomaworld.com/tirecalc?tires=255-85r16-255-80r17
I'm skeptical of a brand that can cost that much less per tire fur 6% less rubber...

 

You guys are totally right. I must have been looking at different sizes to compare. Fail. Lol
I’m thinking that I want to get the Nitto ridge grappler which doesn’t come in a 16”
Thanks for the explanation on rim sizing. Does that mean I would need to match them with the tires like a 33x8.5 or could it be a 33x10.5? Just examples. I’m probably just going to pick up some aluminum 4Runner wheels since I can find those for nice and cheap. I think those are 7.5 which is probably right around what I have now.

 

if they are 2nd Gen wheels you will rub a lot. the 2nd Gen wheels have more backspacing (5.25" compared to 4.5" for 1st Gen alum), pushing the rubber inward. you may need to buy a 1" spacer set to alleviate some of the rubbing.

33x10.5 would work, yours currently are 33x10.2ish based on the size so not that much more. I think it's harder to find the 10.5 vs 12.5 tire width though

 

Most wider spec'd tires will generally fit on a rim as narrow as an 8" and most "skinny" tires will fit on a rim as wide as an 8"er. However, a skiiny tire like a 255/80-17 or a 255/85-16 will not be recommended by the tire manufacturer for use on an 8.5" or wider rim.

Tire manufacturers will typically list the recomended rim width range in the specs for a given tire on their spec sheets.

 

Do you mean second gen taco or 4Runner? I’m looking at 4th - present 4Runner wheels. They look like they’d work. Is the offset and backspacing related?