Disc or drum

Let's look at how brakes work for a second. How they REALLY work. Brakes convert kinetic energy into thermal energy. That's what they do at the base level, they use friction to convert motion into heat.

So, which kind of brake is best? The most efficient and effective brake is the one that can dissipate the most heat, it's as simple as that. The more efficiently a brake dissipates heat, the more motion it can convert to heat and the better you stop. Disks dissipate heat much better than drums, and that's why they perform better.

Now, the skidding tires thing. It's a false argument. If the fastest way to stop a car was to lock up all 4 wheels and skid to a stop, you'd have a point. Unfortunately, that's not the fastest way to stop a car. The most friction between the tire and the road is with the tire just starting to slip. Still rolling, not locked. That's where threshold braking comes from https://www.hemmings.com/blog/2013/04/26/skills-101-threshold-braking/. Heck it's the reason ABS came about. You can lock up the wheels with a quick stab of the brakes because of the interaction between static and kinetic friction, but that's not the best way to stop. The fact that your drums can skid the tires means nothing. It produces more heat, and dissipates more energy, to keep the tires just on the verge of locking up. That's a harder test of the brakes, and that's where drums fail because they don't dissipate heat as well. If the skidding tires thing worked as a test, there'd be no reason for anyone to upgrade their brakes. I could lock up my tires with the factory 10.9" disks, so why did my car stop better with 11.75" disks? 11.75" disks could lock up my tires, so why do 13" disks work better still? It's a false argument, the science does not back it up.

Semi trucks still use drums because they're cheaper and lighter. Not because they stop better, and not because they last longer. Cheaper to build, cheaper to replace, and lighter which means more cargo weight can be carried. And even then, the trucking industry is STILL moving to disks. The US is the hold out, everyone else has already mandated disks for safety, but even here the changeover is happening. The US instituted new safety rules, the manufacturers had to make the drum brakes even bigger to comply. Info here Brake Trends: Drums vs. Discs

A little more info on disks vs. drums. The only reason any major manufacturer still uses drums is cost. Drums are cheap. Brakes: Drum vs. Disc

And I'll bring it back to Mopar here. Mopar Muscle did a rear disk conversion on a '73 Dart Sport and checked the stopping distances between the rear drums and rear disks. Now remember, the rear brakes are probably only doing 20-25% of the braking, so if there was anywhere a drum should be good enough the rear axle would be the place. But that's not what they found. The result was that from 60 mph, with factory disks up front and factory drums in the back the car took 133 feet, 6 inches to stop. After the rear disk conversion, the stoping distance improved to 122 feet 4 inches. That's 11 feet. Maybe it doesn't sound like a lot, but that's almost a car length. 11 feet makes a near miss no big deal, and a solid hit a near miss. The rear disks made that big of a difference even though they're only doing 20% of the braking. And I'm sure that car could lock up the rear wheels with the factory drums. Imagine what the difference is at the front! The online article is kind of a tease, the final stopping distance is in the tags under the pictures for the article, it's on the second to last picture. The hardcopy article is easier to follow, but that's the way it goes. Rear Disc Brakes - All Bound Up - Mopar Muscle Magazine