70/30 is the agreed norm for older cars. Now it is 60/40 and close to 50/50 with many car.

How do I have no clue?
That 10% can be the difference between me or you being correct. Say 4000lbs of braking force.
2800/1200
2400/1600
Now those calculations are removing weight transfer and all other variables but 1600 is significantly more then 1200! I think that might event be 125% but I am just and idiot with no clue.

 

I do think it's comical that you label people as "jackasses" because they consider leaving the front brakes on a truck a good idea.

 

Ok sorry for not reading all of your post I thought they were of finished products that was my fault for assuming. I'm going to give you the benefit of the dought and wait to see your "finished" products. I'm not trying to bash you or start a argument or anything I would like to help in any way I can but you have to agree with me on the front brakes track truck or not you appsolutely need them no question about it. I'm sure there are other ways to loose the weight safely. I would have considered fiberglass fenders or somthing like that before removing such a vital part. I'm not going to go into calculations or anything like that bout weight transfer or anything like that but in reality you hit the brakes at the end of that track going 100+ mph your rear brakes are going to lock up and your gonna slam into a wall or another racer. I just can't see how there is even a debate about this it's common sence.

 

You aren't working with a car, you're working with a 3/4 ton truck that's got a lot of **** taken off/out of it. Mostly in the rear probably. If you can't apply logic to what you are actually putting your hands on you should seriously stop..

 

How the hell can you judge my character? I am the most honest, upfront, truthfully person you will ever know. For you to basically call me a liar saying I would "doctor the testing" has me a bit pissed off.

For you to question my integrity does boil my blood. I can handle criticism, I can have all the negative comments on my ideas and not have a worry in the world but if you are going to call me a liar,fake or make judgment on my honesty you can kiss my ***.

 

Ben hit the nail on the head with the brakes...your comment about your rears having more stopping force than an entire f-body is an ignorant statement and really exposes how little you know about how a motor vehicle operates and functions. I keep trying to keep my comments to myself with this thread, but statements like that really strike a nerve with me. If you delete your front brakes, I hope you invest in a parachute.

 

I was wrong in thinking that there will be a lot of weight transfer, that would only be the case when the front brakes are operational. There won't be much transfer when you are going down the track with the rears sliding as if they were on ice.

 

i am in NO way saying dont run front brakes but ive worked on a few "door slammer" type CARS going 9's with no front brakes. you sure as **** dont want a bumpy shut down area or a 2500+ lb car though without front brakes

the other stuff is just silly. i am one for doing things different too but within reason

 

Three6GMC

This front brake idea has spiraled out of controll due to the people that keep bringing it up. Then someone with a bit an open mind(you) comes along and the entire thing needs to be explained because you certainly can't leave it up to the fools that bring it up every time they get pissed off.

 

Also, those proportions aren't just static weight distribution with the vehicle sitting still. Do you honestly think the rear of YOUR truck has 60/40 much less 50/50 weight bias while braking? Sports cars don't, your pile sure as hell doesn't.