3rd Gen - Rear Drum Brakes???

Have u pulled your ebrake at low speed? I'm guessing not

 

Ladies! ladies! You’re both pretty. Now break it up...

 

I REFUSE to look anything up. EVER.

 

God I miss these drum brake fights. I really do. It’s been over a year since the last legitimate one.

 

Does anybody know what the best oil is for my Tacoma?

 

That's because you live in the southwest. Seized calipers are a lot more expensive than slave cylinders.

 

Take it from Darsheel folks:

 

He’s right you know.

You changed your name AGAIN.


Shocking. THIS fuckin guy.

 

Yeah, coconut oil. Look it up! LMAO

 

Can't possibly agree more on this. I would almost guarantee the people who complain this haven't expected true brake fade. I have with both disc and drum. I love to drive well call it spiritedly. Never had a problem with the 3 Tacoma's rear drum brakes I've had. I also pull often, no problem with the rear.

Now those front rotors I have destroyed several times under repeated hard braking on 2 of my 3 Tacoma's. Was a great chance to upgrade these when I did. Never had a problem with drums stopping.

 

http://knowhow.napaonline.com/why-are-drum-brakes-still-in-modern-cars/

 

I get that drums on the rear of an already light truck are plenty effective. Also, according to Toyota, towing is low priority for Tacoma owners, so again, discs aren't really "mandatory".

My question/concern would be extended use of TRAC (4H on an icy road, for example), in which the brakes are frequently and automatically being applied. I'd presume a fair amount of heat could build up, at which point the traction control WILL shut down (according to Toyota). A disc setup dissipates heat far better, either making TRAC more effective, or just keeping TRAC operational.

Thoughts???

 

Thoughts? Were gonna be fine.

 

Interesting! I never even thought about the extra pads for a parking brake on rear disk brakes. I think Toyota uses drums cause it's cheaper easier and not entirely necessary.

 

The rear brakes on a Tacoma don't do much compared to the front. Very little weight in the rear.

 

Funny you mention the FMVSS; the first FMVSS issued required discs in the front. In 1968... along with seatbelts. Seems like they've know for a long time discs have better stopping power.

 

Shouldn't be riding brakes on hills anyway, that's what the lower gears are for.

 

Jenn's got more junk in the trunk

 

Maybe they kept the drum brakes because they have near-zero drag when compared to disc brakes? Which theoretically increases MPG. I doubt the increased drag reduces fuel efficiency by any measurable degree, but I'd be interesting to know.

 

They don't. Drums actually apply a greater amount of torque given a particular diameter and can stop better than discs in many applications.

Where discs excel is in dissipating heat better and in a scenario where the brakes are generating a great amount of heat, they are less prone to fade. Rear brakes rarely have this issue as they don't have enough of a load on them. If rear drums are causing you issues, you're well beyond the point in which your front discs are fading as well. This is 100% why front discs are mandated - not because they "stop better"