WTF Front Brakes?!?

-
Because they don’t include the important lesson that free stuff can cost you a lot of money!

While this is not true of everything, I would take good condition OE UCA’s over any of those imported reproductions. You know the re-popped stuff isn’t the same thickness. Of course, I wouldn’t install NOS bushings or ball joints in them.
wise words, my friend.

i've held, inspected and installed the aftermarket arms from numerous companies and this is an instance where the OE stuff is noticeably much better.

outfitted with good quality components they're a hard combo to beat for probably 90% of the applications out there.
 
If you don't trust welders you probably wouldn't want to go for a ride in a sub....
bigjohn90.jpg
 
If you don't trust welders you probably wouldn't want to go for a ride in a sub.... View attachment 1716333542

I mean, I trust welders as a profession/skill. But one particular welder of unknown training/skill is a bit of a different story.

Like I’ve got no issue running welded UCA’s in general. That particular set of welded UCA’s? Well like I said, I’d have to see them in person and inspect them.
 
I mean, I trust welders as a profession/skill. But one particular welder of unknown training/skill is a bit of a different story.

Like I’ve got no issue running welded UCA’s in general. That particular set of welded UCA’s? Well like I said, I’d have to see them in person and inspect them.
I fully agree, Not saying the guy who welded these control arms was a good welder... But I am saying it 100% can be done.... I'd like to say only a skilled welder would attempt to weld something as critical as control arms... But unfortunately experience has proven that not to be true...
 
For peace of mind, you could weld a brace across the welded area to strengthen the arm.

Could the arms have been welded to increase caster range?
 
Thanks for the replies everyone. I've been driving the car this way for coming up on two years and even my alignment guy didn't notice anything so I don't feel too bad. The rest of the car was "restored" back in the 90's and I haven't found anything else that was cobbled up, so I'm fairly confident that this was done by someone who knew what he was doing. Maybe he was an old school guy and had a set of B body brakes laying around. Who knows?

That being said, the reason I'm looking over everything is because I have a new engine coming that should be in the 575-600 hp range and I want to make sure everything is good. I may have to reach out to @junkyardhero and see about a pair of his remanned upper control arms. Do you think these would be a bolt in or do I need to get more info on the spindles? Thanks
 
I run the pin-type calipers on my '68. Used '73+ spindles and UCA. Found brackets from '78 Cordoba with 11.81" rotors, same as police car rotors. Much better than the 10.25" rotors, but the same calipers. The only difference between the pin type and sliding calipers is the bracket. I like the pin type as the slider type can wear the slide leading to pads sticking. In modern brakes, they use a SS wear pad that gets replaced with the pads eliminating bracket wear. These are the best brakes I have ever had on my Cuda. Started life with K-H 4-piston disk brakes which were good, but not up to the capabilities of the much larger police brakes.
To mount the calipers forward, I had to use the bent swaybar, which worked fine.

20230310_160626.jpg


20230310_160631.jpg
 
Thanks for the replies everyone. I've been driving the car this way for coming up on two years and even my alignment guy didn't notice anything so I don't feel too bad. The rest of the car was "restored" back in the 90's and I haven't found anything else that was cobbled up, so I'm fairly confident that this was done by someone who knew what he was doing. Maybe he was an old school guy and had a set of B body brakes laying around. Who knows?

That being said, the reason I'm looking over everything is because I have a new engine coming that should be in the 575-600 hp range and I want to make sure everything is good. I may have to reach out to @junkyardhero and see about a pair of his remanned upper control arms. Do you think these would be a bolt in or do I need to get more info on the spindles? Thanks

A stock set of large ball joint UCA’s will bolt in. Whatever spindles you have they are large ball joint. The only question would be the wheel bearings and rotors, whether they’re 70-72 B/E or the more common 73+.
 
Those are not the common 73 / later A body brakes. Those have pins, may be B body, but I'm not familiar with changes over the years, nor am I familiar with brakes on E and other bodies. My 70RR calipers looked like those

Maybe to get the ball joints to fit they welded the outer parts of the arms you your original inner part of the arms.

The A body calipers are retained with a sheet metal clip and two small bolts on top of the caliper, not cross pins
I have the same calipers on my 72' Dodge B300 Van. Missing are the spring clips or maybe called, anti-rattle clips for the mounting bolts.
 
I have the same calipers on my 72' Dodge B300 Van. Missing are the spring clips or maybe called, anti-rattle clips for the mounting bolts.

They may look the same, ie, pin type, but I’m pretty sure the calipers would be the C-body version which has a few different dimensions. The piston is larger and the throw is longer as well because the rotors are thicker on the C-body/truck/van brakes
 
I may have to reach out to @junkyardhero and see about a pair of his remanned upper control arms. Do you think these would be a bolt in or do I need to get more info on the spindles? Thanks
yeah, they're a bolt in for big upper ball joint. like @72bluNblu mentioned, the spindle attachment didn't change but the bearings are different for the different rotors/brakes.

holler up whenever man, i'll be around.
 
Here's a pic of the caliper. KH86166 is the casting number and they were used on 70-72 B bodies and 70-74 E bodies.

IMG_1409.jpeg
 
Here's a pic of the caliper. KH86166 is the casting number and they were used on 70-72 B bodies and 70-74 E bodies.

View attachment 1716334134

Correct, I think. E bodies kept the pin style calipers for the whole run, '70-74. I'm not entirely sure when the B bodies changed over to sliders, by the parts catalog it looks like '73 was pin type and '74 was sliders but knowing Mopar there was probably some changeover period.

That would be '70-2 E-bodies. '73-4 used the same brakes as an A-body those years. .

Nope. E-bodies were pin style calipers for the whole run. The spindles changed in '73 but E's kept the pin type calipers. You can check the cross references, look at the brake hoses which are different for the pin style calipers, etc. Or look at the '73 mopar parts catalog. The "V, L" line was A-bodies.

Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 6.53.44 PM.png


Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 6.53.57 PM.png


The '74 parts catalog added sliders for the R, W lines, so, '74 lists sliders for A and B bodies. And it specially calls out pin type and slider calipers.

Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 7.05.58 PM.png


Screenshot 2024-12-01 at 7.06.13 PM.png
 
Funny, it lists V, L, R & W as having sliders in one picture

And the next shows pin style all except V & L......
 
Funny, it lists V, L, R & W as having sliders in one picture

And the next shows pin style all except V & L......

Yeah that’s the ‘74 catalog. It’s literally the same page, I broke it up so it would be legible but those illustrations are right on top of each other. I’d say it was a carryover from the ‘73 catalog and then they changed the slider illustration but the text is different from ‘73 on both illustrations. So B bodies are a bit of a question mark. They definitely switched to sliders at some point in there but my B body is a ‘71 and I don’t know much about the 73+ B’s.

The E bodies didn’t change all the suspension stuff like the B’s did though in ‘73, everything basically stayed the same for the E’s except the spindles for ‘73. And the bumpers but that’s not really relevant.
 
I wouldn’t necessarily count bushings and ball joints already installed as a plus in most cases anymore. The bushings will be standard bushings, not offset bushings, so I wouldn’t even use them to begin with if you’re running radials as you’ll want offset bushings to get a decent alignment with good positive caster. And then yeah, a lot of the low end ball joints out there right now are terrible.

Free isn’t a good price if you have to replace the parts and add labor to do it.

If they’re good parts awesome, but if you don’t know what you’re getting it’s a dice roll.

Yeah, I would agree with this. In my case, I will be removing the bushings and installing the offset bushings I had already bought. I also bought new upper ball joints before I realized I needed control arms, but I'll probably just leave the ones pre-installed on the new arms and keep an eye on them. I hadn't yet bought lower ball joints so that was a bonus for me. Like the uppers, I'll use them and keep a close eye on them.

I'm not too worried about the labour, I can manage the ball joints myself. Something like bad replacement tie rods would piss me off because then I would have the pay someone to align the car. Parts quality is a dice roll with almost any brand these days, fingers crossed it works out for me.
 
While this is not true of everything, I would take good condition OE UCA’s over any of those imported reproductions. You know the re-popped stuff isn’t the same thickness. Of course, I wouldn’t install NOS bushings or ball joints in them.

For sure, 100 times out of 100 I would prefer to go with the OE option. Problem is I couldn't get any 73+ upper arms local to me, so I hit the easy button and ordered them from Summit. Delivered to a friend's mom's place in the US so I didn't pay duties, taxes, or international shipping. He visited his mom and brought them back for me.

You raise a good question about the weight. I have a set of OE 72 arms (which were supposed to be 73+ arms) so I can weigh them both and see how close the new repop is.
 
I think this is overstated. Obviously it’s your opinion and if it was your car you can do as you like.

But you can absolutely weld on UCA’s like that and have it be more than strong enough for continued, long term use- if the welds are good.

Now, not knowing the history on those particular UCA’s, who did the work, or how long ago, etc, would lead me to replacing them if it was my car. But that’s not the same as saying those UCA’s aren’t structurally sound. I’m not gonna say they are or aren’t based on a couple pictures on the internet, but that kind of work can absolutely be done safely if it’s done correctly.

fatigue strength of a weld is orders of magnitude lower than that of the parent material, if I'm using this as a regular driver, I wouldn't chance it given the relatively small cross section of the arm at that point....given the cost to repair the car if a UCA breaks, I would replace them.
 
fatigue strength of a weld is orders of magnitude lower than that of the parent material, if I'm using this as a regular driver, I wouldn't chance it given the relatively small cross section of the arm at that point....given the cost to repair the car if a UCA breaks, I would replace them.

I'd like to see your source information for the fatigue strength of the welds being "orders of magnitude" lower than the parent material. Because in general welds are not modeled as that much weaker than the parent material in an engineering setting. The strength of the weld is dependent on the parent metal and the filler metal used, but orders of magnitude weaker is not common at all.

Welded correctly those UCA's would likely outlast most of the members on this board, myself included. I myself would likely replace them, but only because of their unknown provenance, not just because they were welded.
 
I'd like to see your source information for the welds being "orders of magnitude" lower than the parent material. Because in general welds are not modeled as that much weaker than the parent material in an engineering setting. The strength of the weld is dependent on the parent metal and the filler metal used, but orders of magnitude weaker is not common at all.

Welded correctly those UCA's would likely outlast most of the members on this board, myself included. I myself would likely replace them, but only because of their unknown provenance, not just because they were welded.

fatigue curves of different parent materials and different BSI weld classifications developed by Caterpillar over the last 60 years that I used over the 8+ years I did fatigue analysis on buckets, motograder frames, and other components for them. Tensile strength, with a single static load, yes, a proper weld is stronger than parent material. A well done, fully ground and polished class A weld, fatigue strength is nearly the same as parent material....lesser classifications (say a class C with a cold stop & start at the end) will be significantly lower in weld life. back side looks decent, front looks like somewhere between a B & C, with a big booger of weld that will create a stress riser. also,if doing something like this, you would not want to weld right where the cross section transitions from fairly large to very small (right where the weld is), as that's a geometric stress concentrator, I'd want to see it maybe an inch or so down the leg in the more constant cross section area....

and yes, for fatigue analysis, welds are most definitely modeled with different properties to estimate life.
 
fatigue curves of different parent materials and different BSI weld classifications developed by Caterpillar over the last 60 years that I used over the 8+ years I did fatigue analysis on buckets, motograder frames, and other components for them. Tensile strength, with a single static load, yes, a proper weld is stronger than parent material. A well done, fully ground and polished class A weld, fatigue strength is nearly the same as parent material....lesser classifications (say a class C with a cold stop & start at the end) will be significantly lower in weld life. back side looks decent, front looks like somewhere between a B & C, with a big booger of weld that will create a stress riser. also,if doing something like this, you would not want to weld right where the cross section transitions from fairly large to very small (right where the weld is), as that's a geometric stress concentrator, I'd want to see it maybe an inch or so down the leg in the more constant cross section area....

and yes, for fatigue analysis, welds are most definitely modeled with different properties to estimate life.

Ok, so you're building in your grading of those particular welds to come anywhere near "orders of magnitude". That's not a general statement about the fatigue strength of welds then, which is what it sounded like.

I appreciate you have experience in this, and it sounds like a lot more specific practical experience than I do, and that was why I asked about your sources. But I'm sure you know then that grading a weld via a low resolution picture on the internet isn't a good idea . We don't know the welding procedure used or the filler material, we can't even see the entire length of the weld, the whole thing is painted, etc.

I still stand by my statement, done CORRECTLY those UCA's could easily be strong enough to run without concern. I agree that the location they were sectioned is not ideal. But I don't think we can know enough about those welds to say they're "orders of magnitude" weaker without knowing a lot more about that particular weld itself, some of which we just can't know (like the filler material), and some of which we can't make good assumptions on based a few pictures.

And ultimately I think we agree on replacing them, I would just because it would probably cost more money and effort to figure out enough about them to determine their strength accurately than it would cost to just replace them.
 
-
Back
Top