Mark VII's came All Wheel Disk, at 3893.25lbs from a 100 drop they do pretty damn well. Cause of the ABS?

 

I'm not familiar with Mark7 brakes. I am not sure they had ABS,.. did they?

ABS helps stop faster because it allows you to stand on the brake,.. hard as you can and still maintain control by not allowing the wheels to lock up. You would think that locked up wheels will stop faster then a rolling wheel. This has been proven false. You will stop faster with the tires at the edge of losing traction then you will if the tires are frozen in a skid type situation. Not only that,.. you have no steering or control once in a skid. This is why in the rain you will stop faster with ABS then not.

I used to hate ABS. My brothers 1991 E150 wheelchair MarkIII conversion van and my 1993 F250 both had rear wheel antilock brakes. I understand why they rear ABS vs no ABS,.. but it used to piss me off when the front tires would lock up and the thing would just plow through the snow. I was pulling my car trailer in the rain once with my father inlaws 49 Chevy on the back. The light turned yellow and the car in front of me decided to brake hard to stop for the light. I hit the brakes and started to slide,.. I let off and steered around the car and ended up running the light. They used rear ABS so if the rear locked up it would not put the truck into a spin where the rear wants to come around to the front. If your ever in a deserted parking lot in the rain or snow,.. you can practice this theory by getting up to 30 or 40 mph and then jamming on your parking brake. It is very difficult to keep from spinning out.

It was not until my 96 Mustang that I had a car with 4 wheel ABS. I was here in Fla and this old fart in an S10 pulled out in front of me. I jammed on the brakes,.. the ABS kicked on,.. I felt the pedal get hard,.. I let off because my instinct was to pump the brakes and then I remembered the rule for ABS so I jammed my foot back on as hard as I could. I didnt lose control and I didnt run into the back of the old fucker. I was madder then Hades,. but I survived unscathed. From that moment on I learned to like ABS. If I could figure out an affordable and practical way to get ABS on my 93 I would do it in a heartbeat.

As for the Mark7,.. didnt they have a larger front rotor then the Fox? That may or may not contribute to it being able to stop faster. I know the hot trick back in the day with 69 - 92 Camaros used to be swapping over to Caprice front brakes for better braking. Used to do the same thing to GTO's and Chevelles. Throw on some 80 - 87 Caprice brakes and you had much better braking then what came factory. Kinda scary to think that an 85 Caprice had better brakes then a 85 Iroc.

Hurst

 

Hurst you need a hobby lol

 

My .02 cents.

Hurst I am with you on the so called "bling" factor in only the fact that discs are cleaner looking than drums. Probably my number one reason for running rear discs vs drums is maintenance. Drums have too many moving parts in my opinion. From springs to levers and slide mechanisms, adjusters and some vehicles even have small cables inside the drum. Not to mention the wheel cylinders that like to leak into the drum area and gum it all up. What a mess.
Discs are simple. Keep the "glide pins" clean and lubed and your good to go.

BTW anyone wanting to have the fox track with and 11.375" rear discs with some pads that are twice the size of SN95 ones see below.

Here you go DRDirt.

Rear disc conversion

 

Yeah, I've got that link as well as a few others. I wrestled an 89 MK VII to the ground Saturday. It extracted a pound of flesh from me and I got its rear brakes from it while it was feeding. The damn thing had to have ABS on it so I had to go to the extra step of pulling the axles so I could get the brackets off...damn exciter rings. I talked to Harold from the junk yard and he told me that YOU were the man when it comes to MK VII conversions. So, don't be surprised if I start bugging you when the time comes...sometime in the next 3 or 4 years I'd say.

The only reason I'm doing it is so I can go 5 lug, keep the stock width and run some 17x9's all the way around. I haven't rear ended anybody on the street with 5 Foxes...well, 6 I guess if you count the TC, but it had ABS and 4 wheel disc. The Mustangs though have always served me well with both positive and negative acceleration. Of course, my daily driver's have never gotten above 130 in the quarter. But I never had any trouble making the turnoff...even the first one if I wanted to take it. Twisties and gooney bird racing might be a different story...but I'll never know for sure.

 

I'm a little late on this,.. but this is my hobby nucka.

What better of an asshole to school the children then me?

When I told you of my plans for my brakes you agreed and said I should be fine. My concern at the time was if I would need a different proportion valve with the larger rotors up front. You said I should be fine with the stock one if I leave the drums on the rear. Since that is my plan,.. I wont know how it behaves until I actually complete the 5 lug conversion. And with my current finances,.. that a ways down the road.

Hurst

 

I use drum brakes on the front and disk on the rear... just to be different.

 

Chevelle Rob has been running 4 wheel drum brakes on his behemoth and he stops just fine. Granted he runs mostly 1/8 mile.. but he's been to a few Dead Hooker events at Bradenton and I've seen him at Runday Sundays at Bradenton a few times as well. That car has seen more track passes then most people take showers and its not a slow car.

Hurst

 

yeah but he has big drum brakes lol

 

Just for BLING