Jump to content

1955 Dodge Custom Royal Rear brakes.


Chipster
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guys,

 

My 1955 Dodge Custom Royal hasn’t been on the road since 1990, all the brakes were locked up and needing a  complete overhaul.
After cleaning and reinstalling all, backing plates, new shoes, brake cylinders, etc..

Wondering why I can’t seem to get the drums back on?

I under the concept of centering the shoes to the axle. I haven’t placed the Ammco 1750 on yet but
everything is backed off and should be at its least amount of shoe diameter. Major adjustment arrows are lined up correctly and minors are backed all the back.

Brake drums have been turned.

I have seen a post about different Wheel cyl piston rod length's??
Wondering, I’m using my old slotted rods with new aftermarket cyl’s from one of the main vintage mopar parts companies.
 Anyone else experience this?

 

1FC68CD5-9BA5-4CBB-AD7F-EB5562D69B2D.jpeg

A61CAEE0-01D4-4168-9FE4-7501DFFC10DF.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard horror stories of several different wrong combinations of piston and pushrod that are possible, and of people not being able to get the brand new cylinders to fit at all. I have never run into it myself. I usually overhaul the old ones.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloo,

 

Thats what I’m a wondering about also.

I did hear about wheel cyl problems and different pin lengths to fit certain cylinders. Would have liked to rebuild my original but the rust..

I’m thinking getting the gauge on then and getting it concentric to the C/L.

Once it’s squared up I can confirm whether the new cyl and old pin lengths will work.

Thanks for the input!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shoe on the right is definitely out the whole way at the bottom.  There is a guy on here from NY, Craig S., that sells new Chrysler products that I had really good luck with.  Can't remember what he goes by on here... 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DFEENEY,

 

Ya, the major adjustment are back to the factory settings which set’s the shoes all the way in.( Arrows pointing at each other)

Also the minor adjustments are all the way in, making the shoes at their smallest dia possible.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talking with the parts guy I found that they do indeed sell shorter brake cyl to shoe rods/pins.

Mopar used the same rod for many models and years.

My only thought is that the new Cylinders purchased are designed for other years or applications and on my application it wont work with the stock pins.

However he is sending me the shorter pins.

Thanks for all the help.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the lining on the new shoes might be too thick.
A very common issue on this era Chrysler product brakes (I have tons of experience with ‘55 - ‘62 Chrysler Corp. cars).

 

Please consult your factory service manual, but if I recall correctly, lining thickness on all ‘55 cars should be about .200” or less*.
Measure and if needed, cut down/re-arc accordingly, but make sure arcing also includes matching each pair to their respective drum IDs.

 

*I usually aim for similar to or only slightly thicker lining than the shoe core base the lining is glued or riveted on, as it allows an easy installation, plenty of room for all adjustments, yet still provides tens of thousands of safe driving miles, if properly maintained.

Edited by TTR (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As TTR stated, I also had experience with bonded brake shoes, verses riveted brake shoes, the bonded (glued to metal) shoes were oversize and had to be arc to fit each drum they were paired up to, and that also reduced brake noise because they fit together very well.

 

 

Bob

43F785BC-CAE1-40D5-9109-0C6E6E3F4002.png

Edited by NailheadBob
Add photo (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed a combo of both riveted and bonded, shoes. I’m thinking the fronts were bonded. In the day it was a common practice but I’ve not seen one of those shoe machines in many moons.

Probably a museum piece now.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bonding vs. riveting in itself is not the cause for my aforementioned issue.
The problem, if you will, is the lining material produced and used for (and bonded to) brake shoes today is just thicker, which may not necessarily be an issue with all types of designs, but definitely common with ones used in '50s and early '60s Chrysler Corp. cars

Most people (including many so-called professionals) just don’t realize or understand that just because something is new or newly rebuilt/-done doesn’t always mean it will work “right out of the box” (and something done or made in C***a often makes it even more apparent).

I could fill a book or two with examples.

 

Riveting brake bands and shoes can be done without any specifically designed equipment.
I’ve done it on many occasions and recently for a parking brake band on my Roadster, although it wasn’t due to lining replacement, but rather fixing/improving previously done inadequate job by someone else, perhaps factory.

Edited by TTR (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

A issue of either one or both...

OE long length pushrod  and or  replacement wheel cylinder piston length.

The other common issue as mentioned is too thick of lining.

Quickly solved by experience and proper equipment.....which today is not easy to find by most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...