When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Doing the parking brakes on my '75. 3 of the 4 brake springs were broken and one shoe retainer is chewed in half. Problem is----the drivers side hub flange has no access hole to reach the shoe anchors. Got 5 holes spaced in between the studs and 2 larger ones farther out on the hub. Passanger side has the adjuster hole. I'm going to drill one of the 5 small holes out to make the access hole in the hub flg. Anybody see a problem with this?
Thanks
Stump
Yes- 12 holes. My driver side looks exactly like your picture. However----The pass side has one of the 5 inner holes drilled to 7/8" dia which made it really easy to remove the shoe retainers. The enlarged hole appears to be nicely chamfered and looks like I'd expect a "factory" piece to look. Any idea what's going on here?
I have seen a set of aftermarket rotors we pulled off a customers car with no hole for the shoe adjustment. Not sure what/where he got the rotors, but without being able to adjust the shoe the system is useless.
The rotors are not a problem. What I'm concerned with is the hub. The access holes on the driver's side are positioned corrrectly but are not large enough to allow a set of needle nose to open once inserted. The pass side is VERY easy to work with due to a hole being enlarged to 7/8" dia. As far as the rotor goes, I'm not going to mess with that at all as the hole sizes are large enough to fit a medium screwdriver. My main problem is removing and reinstalling the brake shoe anchor springs and cups through a opening that's too small.
Hope all this is making sense.
What I'm getting from the OP is that he wants to enlarge one of the rivet holes to be able to access the hold down springs.
Not sure if the hole would land directly over the hold down spring.
It seems the passenger side has a 7/8ths hole on the spindle flange, for access to the retaining spring, and he wants to make a similar hole on the drivers side.
I doubt that making the hole larger would effect either the flanges structural integrity or balance.
I have also wondered why an access hole for the hold down springs was not machined in the spindle flanges from the factory.
I understand that these holes would not be needed for installation of the parking brake assembly at the factory but it sure would make servicing the parking brakes, with the spindles in place, much easier.
I'm with you Sly! I would even like a "Star" flange over the round one. Do away with reaching through little holes to fumble with springs and pins. And, yes, you are right about the hole not aligning with the spring perfectly but it is close enough to make things easy. I'm begining to think that the 7/8" hole was more intended to be able to reach the nuts behind the hub with a socket straight on as it aligns pretty well with those also.
Thanks for the help
So, what we are dealing with is the driver side is correct, but the passenger side has been modified.
Actually it was never intended to do work through that hole, but just to adjust the star wheel on the adjuster. It was intended that you remove the axle for service. However, there have been some aftermarket tools developed to deal with the problem. Still not easy though.
So, what we are dealing with is the driver side is correct, but the passenger side has been modified.
Actually it was never intended to do work through that hole, but just to adjust the star wheel on the adjuster. It was intended that you remove the axle for service.
and the other holes were for either wheel studs, or rivet shanks that originally held the rotor and spindle together during manufacturing. Nothing to do with playing with the e-brake.
I understand that these holes would not be needed for installation of the parking brake assembly at the factory but it sure would make servicing the parking brakes, with the spindles in place, much easier.
The factory never intended the spindle/hub to be separated from the rotor- they were machined as a matched set. Drilling out rivets is an invention of the aftermarket with well known negative side effects.
Here goes my last question. Concerning the match-machining of rotor and rear hub. Would you be expected to replace the hub if you scored or warped a rear rotor? What about the front rotors? same scenario? If that's the case I'm pretty happy about the aftermarket inventing a way to work on something as spendy as the replacement of a perfectly serviceable flange or hub to replace a sub-assembly that has been riveted on.
Lord knows this thing has stock disc brakes that are far from being 1975 state of the art. I can easily envision rotor replacement from a stuck disc or scoring from pea gravel in those mud shields.
Thanks again for all the comments and help.
Here goes my last question. Concerning the match-machining of rotor and rear hub. Would you be expected to replace the hub if you scored or warped a rear rotor? What about the front rotors? same scenario?
In a word yes- that's how GM sold replacement parts. The need to actually replace rotors due to damage was, and is very low. Most C2/C3 rotors outlive the rest of the car.
The perception that rotors are a throw-away that need to be changed or 'turned' at every brake servicing is a much more recent phenomena. My car has over 130,000 miles and and two of the four rotors are the untouched originals. I thought I was doing the right thing by changing the other two, dumb mistake on my part.