custm2500

iTrader: (10)

silver-mod-o:
Modern vehicals are much generaly about a 60/40 bias.
Hence the reason disks are found much more often on the rears.

1slow01Z71

iTrader: (36)

For the love of god its not a SHOOT, its a CHUTE. Youre not shooting a damn gun.

custm2500

iTrader: (10)

Means nothing to a closed minded person such as your self but never really reality. More along the lines of possibility.

smokeshow

iTrader: (16)

Come on man, this is basic physics. You might have a chance of stopping with a car, but certainly not a truck. There are two types of friction, static and kinetic. Both are functions of the force between the surfaces in contact. When you hit the brakes, the weight IS going to "move forward" and pull that downward force off of the rear tires. Therefore your static friction with the ground is going to decrease by probably 200%. Furthermore, its going to lock up the tires, so it becomes kinetic friction since the tire's contact patch is now in motion relative to the ground. The coefficient of kinetic friction is always magnitudes less than static, so your braking is going to get even worse when it locks up. So you'll have a hell of a time stopping any way you look at it.

We aren't trying to steer you wrong here...

MikeGyver

iTrader: (5)

What do want, an article from HOT Rod magazine or something? You've used that line before, I think it is just your way of saying that you don't care what anybody here says.

Mangled03gmc

iTrader: (95)

custm2500

iTrader: (10)

smokeshow

I fully understand this. I don't see why everyone keeps waisting there time. I am going to give it a shot and I will video all of it. I hope and pray to be able to prove all of the people that keep driving the same issues into the ground wrong. Then I will hook the fronts up or install lighter calipers if I have them by then.

Very simple. All you people can keep on bitching and constantly beating the dead horse or shut the hell up and save us all a bunch of time and we will have a result some time down the road.

It is purely a goal of proving people wrong at this point. I probably won't ever take the truck to the track without front brakes but i will block them off and see if I can get up to a good speed and stop the truck in a reasonably short distance. Starting at only 5-10 mph then working up to atleast 40-60 jumping 5-10 mph with each test.

silver-mod-o

iTrader: (15)

... Dude... I was just throwing out a number that's close, much like you do in your "precision" measurements. The fact is, a truck will be closer to 70/30 while braking (with no additional weight in the bed) and probably even more front biased since weight is easier to take out of the rear and the easiest place is where you will start. Don't let 10% one way or another seriously be what you bade this optimism on... Especially when you really have no clue to begin with.

custm2500

iTrader: (10)

It isn't that I don't care what anyone says here. It is that until proven wrong the is no answer. A fact isn't a fact till it is proven. Very simple. Everything especially out of the box ideas has to be tested.

I think the fools who are beating the dead horse think I am going to rip all the front brakes off and hit the track running 100+mph. That is the idea most of the jack asses on this site have of me. I might be on the edge with my ideas but I am not a ******* idiot. I explained if fair detail in my previous post what the RD of the no front brakes will entail.

silver-mod-o

iTrader: (15)

Youd be the one to doctor your testing to make something seem like it worked your way. You are flat out foolish for even considering it...