Arrrgh, I wish I'd caught you before you dealt with the used discs. Here's why.
I've done this sort of swap before, only not on a Bronco, on a '87 BMW 535is. Why'd I install disc brakes on a car that already had them, you might ask; well the brakes from a early '90's 740i/750i fit perfectly except for the rear disc, which must come from a mid-'90's 540i. No problem, disc's for these cars are on the order of $50.00 each if you shop correctly. The result is nothing but astonishing. Going up on the front brakes is pretty good, but the increase in rear braking makes the whole system waaay better. Seems the torque from the rear brakes counter acts torque from the front brakes and makes both front and rear brakes more effective.
Wait, I getting to my first statement. It seems that Ford already has disc's with the correct stud hole pattern, so for just a bit of money you could have had the discs with the holes you need, and new discs that would give you a lot of miles before they need attention. But, it would have been at least $100.00 more to do that.
In my opinion, better brakes are nearly always worth the price, after all, why leave things OEM when better is out there?
[quote=fastpat]Arrrgh, I wish I'd caught you before you dealt with the used discs. Here's why.
I've done this sort of swap before, only not on a Bronco, on a '87 BMW 535is. Why'd I install disc brakes on a car that already had them, you might ask; well the brakes from a early '90's 740i/750i fit perfectly except for the rear disc, which must come from a mid-'90's 540i. No problem, disc's for these cars are on the order of $50.00 each if you shop correctly. The result is nothing but astonishing. Going up on the front brakes is pretty good, but the increase in rear braking makes the whole system waaay better. Seems the torque from the rear brakes counter acts torque from the front brakes and makes both front and rear brakes more effective.
Wait, I getting to my first statement. It seems that Ford already has disc's with the correct stud hole pattern, so for just a bit of money you could have had the discs with the holes you need, and new discs that would give you a lot of miles before they need attention. But, it would have been at least $100.00 more to do that.
In my opinion, better brakes are nearly always worth the price, after all, why leave things OEM when better is out there? [/QUOTE
What ford would have the correct stud hole pattern? Drilling the holes were not an issure for me, I have the equipment to do so so cost is nothing for that. I have new rotors just tried it out on an old set first. But seriously what ones from ford have the correct stud pattern?
But seriously what ones from ford have the correct stud pattern?
The article indicated that there's a Ford Performance kit, but then it shows them drilling the disc too. Go figure. If you have the equipment, then even new disc's for a more common OEM configuration would make sense, and cost less.
Bossind, since I don't have anything newer than Bronco's and I've not worked on any Expeditions I'm not real familar with the Expedition rears, etc. Do they still use the 5.5" wheel bolt pattern? Can any parts from the Expedition be used for the rear axle or brake conversion or is the Explorer better suited for it?
The 96 bronco and the f150 were the last of the 5.5. The bolt pattern is differant I had to redrill mine, if i said expedition I mean explorer is what I used, but the backing plates bolt right in. If i remember correct the expedition uses a 13" rotor so you would need a 17" rim to clear it, the explorer is an 11" and fits perfectly behind out 15" rim.
You mean the standart RABS HYDRAULIC CONTROL VALVE?
No on mine its a regular portion valve as I have 4 wheel abs, I take it you only have rear abs. Regardless its the same for you and you don't need to do anything to that valve, how ever there is a valve on the master cylinder (between the brake line and the master cylinder) that needs to be gutted.
I have to disagree about the Bronco's being front end heavy--- They along with the last van I had w/460 are surprisingly well balanced. I have tried to weigh every vehicle I've owned with a F/R weight.
I have a 93 EB 5.8 w/3:55's/E4OD (4W ABS, drum rears). My scale weight is:
No on mine its a regular portion valve as I have 4 wheel abs, I take it you only have rear abs.
Yes, I own Bronco 1992 5.0 E04D with rear ABS. But I haven't seen any regular portion valve on my break lines, and in the manuals there are'nt any words about it There is only rear ABS hydraulic control valve on the frame under the break master cylinder. So where is exactly portion valve situated (maybe you have a picture)?
Yes, I own Bronco 1992 5.0 E04D with rear ABS. But I haven't seen any regular portion valve on my break lines, and in the manuals there are'nt any words about it There is only rear ABS hydraulic control valve on the frame under the break master cylinder. So where is exactly portion valve situated (maybe you have a picture)?
Thats right, mine is a 96 bronco, so my valve is different. But like I said it doesn't matter as you don't do a thing to this valve.
The valve you need to work on is below the master cylinder reservoir, I have hydroboost but it doesn't matter, notice the the block looking adapter thingy that the rear brake line is going into on my master cylinder? You need to gut that, it has a spring and bearing in it - remove them.
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
Pics added to gallery.
There is only rear ABS hydraulic control valve on the frame under the break master cylinder. So where is exactly portion valve situated (maybe you have a picture)?
