LocostUSA.com

Learning how to build Lotus Seven replicas...together!
It is currently April 9, 2020, 1:06 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 4:48 am 
Offline

Joined: February 18, 2011, 3:02 am
Posts: 108
A local performance shop had a going out of business auction and I ended up snagging a set of Belltech #2600, 2in drop spindles for the 86-90 Dodge Dakota for stupid cheap. In my research it turns out that this generation in 2wd has 5x114.3 hubs, had a 5.2L Shelby model and shares front ball joints with many Chrysler vehicles from the mid 50s on up to the first gen Dodge Viper. It lists the K778 as the upper and the K727 as the lower (which i think is a pretty popular ball joint here)

Could be interesting. I'll post a picture after I have them home.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 8:26 am 
Offline
Automotive Encyclopedia
User avatar

Joined: December 22, 2006, 2:05 pm
Posts: 6604
They also make a good choice because they are front steer and the arms are correctly angled for rack and pinion steering. Most 90 and older had 14 inch wheels with 10.6” rotors so the calipers would clear the inside of the wheel.

There were some 15 inch wheel trucks that used a 11.3” rotor but either the caliper or spindle was different to accommodate the caliper relocation. It appears the 90 and older rare 15 inch setup was essentially the same as the 91-96 setup which also included larger bore calipers (from 60mm to 65) with the same size master (15/16) for more pressure at the pads.

I suspect your dropped spindles are for the 14 inch wheel application and overkill in a sub 2000lb car but check. Don’t want to order the wrong size rotors!

FWIW, the 91-96 is the same basic design as the 87-90, uses the same screw-in joints, but has bigger rotors and bigger bore calipers.

_________________
MV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om3C1Ep ... D3E18BB447


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: September 22, 2005, 8:12 am
Posts: 1699
Location: 4AGE in S.E. Michigan
I will 2nd MV8's "overkill in a sub 2000lb car" I would look at all your options when selecting calipers. I have 10.3" diameter front disc, and actually down-graded caliper size, from a 56mm to a 50mm Dia., because it was to easy to lock up the brakes. Using a 13/16" Dia M/C, with 5 to1 lever ratio.
Davew


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 5:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 18, 2011, 3:02 am
Posts: 108
Miatav8,MstrASE,A&P,F wrote:
They also make a good choice because they are front steer and the arms are correctly angled for rack and pinion steering. Most 90 and older had 14 inch wheels with 10.6” rotors so the calipers would clear the inside of the wheel.

There were some 15 inch wheel trucks that used a 11.3” rotor but either the caliper or spindle was different to accommodate the caliper relocation. It appears the 90 and older rare 15 inch setup was essentially the same as the 91-96 setup which also included larger bore calipers (from 60mm to 65) with the same size master (15/16) for more pressure at the pads.

I suspect your dropped spindles are for the 14 inch wheel application and overkill in a sub 2000lb car but check. Don’t want to order the wrong size rotors!

FWIW, the 91-96 is the same basic design as the 87-90, uses the same screw-in joints, but has bigger rotors and bigger bore calipers.


Are you familiar with the first gen Dodge trucks? All the research so far shows the same inner and outer wheel bearings for the RWD truck regardless of engine or brake rotor size (even the 5.2L Shelby). I assumed that would mean the 11.3 or the 10.6 rotor would fit on the same stub axle. Like you said, I don't see any applications of the 10.3 in rotor passed 1989 trucks.

davew wrote:
I will 2nd MV8's "overkill in a sub 2000lb car" I would look at all your options when selecting calipers. I have 10.3" diameter front disc, and actually down-graded caliper size, from a 56mm to a 50mm Dia., because it was to easy to lock up the brakes. Using a 13/16" Dia M/C, with 5 to1 lever ratio.
Davew


That's good to know since the stock caliper on the base 2wd 4cyl truck is 60mm... Hahaha. I wonder how easy it would be to adapt a smaller fixed caliper. Maybe a 2 piston from the rear of someone's modern performance car hahaha.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 5:54 pm 
Offline
Automotive Encyclopedia
User avatar

Joined: December 22, 2006, 2:05 pm
Posts: 6604
The caliper bracket is built into the spindle on these. The larger rotor would place the caliper further out to make use of the greater leverage. I assume you don't want to re-engineer the caliper mounting if it turns out these spindles don't match the rotors you ultimately purchase.

I was wondering why you didn't just use another pair of subbie spindles and brakes for the front that match the rear.

_________________
MV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om3C1Ep ... D3E18BB447


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 8:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 18, 2011, 3:02 am
Posts: 108
Miatav8,MstrASE,A&P,F wrote:
The caliper bracket is built into the spindle on these. The larger rotor would place the caliper further out to make use of the greater leverage. I assume you don't want to re-engineer the caliper mounting if it turns out these spindles don't match the rotors you ultimately purchase.

I was wondering why you didn't just use another pair of subbie spindles and brakes for the front that match the rear.



I figured that the mount holes on the caliper would make up the difference for where the caliper was mounted depending on which size rotor was on the vehicle. From what I can tell, Belltech made spindles for 86-90 and 91-96. Both versions say they fit all 3 engine choices for their respective year groups and since ball joints and wheel bearings seemed to be the same as well, it seemed reasonable to assume the caliper mount was the same regardless of brake set up. If you ran the small rotors it was 60mm caliper and big rotors was 66mm caliper.

I don't have a build at all right now, anymore at least while I'm stationed overseas so, anything is still possible but, at $18 I couldn't pass these guys up and at least bring them home. And then when I found out they were designed to fit a pretty popular ball joint all ready it peaked my interest. They're not light though, they weighed in at 14.6lbs naked.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 24, 2019, 8:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 18, 2011, 3:02 am
Posts: 108
Double Post


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: November 25, 2019, 7:24 pm 
Offline
Automotive Encyclopedia
User avatar

Joined: December 22, 2006, 2:05 pm
Posts: 6604
I hope your right about the 66mm pistons being a little further from the mounting bolts to comp.
I looked at the 80s and 90s lowering spindles (pn 2600 and 2605). It appears the caliper flange is the same but the tie rod pins are thicker on the 90s. Can't beat $18. You could resell them easily for profit after you get back to the lower 48.

_________________
MV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om3C1Ep ... D3E18BB447


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
POWERED_BY