Oversized brakes

Page 1 of 2  
I would like to install oversized front rotors/brakes on a 2002 Ford Taurus SEL. The car has great sized brakes as it is, but for mountain driving with a carload of passengers it's a bit edgy even with the
transmission out of overdrive.
Does this aftermarket part exist? I realize it's probably only available as a part for the SHO, if it's for the SHO will it be interchangeable? I tried looking for it on google without much luck. The rotors are vented only they still seem to heat up. Rear rotors are out of the question as it won't make much of a difference.
tia
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Frankly, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles racing team in IMSA discovered that the SHO brakes *also* sucked. A story is below. There is probably something you could stick in there that would work better, but it might also be cheaper to buy a different car.
One of the TMNT drivers came to our Honda team the following year and told us how he was braking for Turn One at Watkins Glen when he heard Randy Pobst go by in one of our Preludes and *upshift*! It was then he decided he was driving thr wrong car. =:^O -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
So it looks like it's hopeless than.
I enjoy the ride and feel of a "car" rather than the tall, wobbly uncontrolled feel of a truck or SUV.
On the other hand I still want a car that can tow. I'd like one with strong brakes, RWD or AWD, manual transmission, and great gas/diesel mileage.
I would rather have just ONE car. I would rather just have ONE insurance to pay. Why should I purchase a car plus a truck for the utility? All I need is ONE vehicle that can do everything that I need it to do. Why is that so much to ask for?
Also I don't want to have to RENT a truck every time I need the utility. I don't like renting anything other than an apartment, plus renting trucks gets very expensive.
Maybe I'm living in the wrong era. I have only read and heard about times when cars were heavy body on frame designs, RWD with V8 and were all capable of towing.
I wonder what that must have been like. Living in a time when cars can do a lot more than haul 4 or 5 people and maybe some light baggage in the trunk.
Anyone from that era care to share?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
A truck body-on-frame is usually better for towing something that's very heavy.
You really do need two vehicles if you want to drive a car most of the time, yet plan on towing something like a boat.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nah, I really don't like how everyone has to have several motorized vehicles. Several motorcycles I don't mind though but I have seen so many go way overboard with cars and trucks.
If everyone in the United States keeps this up, there will eventually be several times more cars and trucks than there are people living in this country and how can that possibly be a good thing?
I'm a nature lover yet I don't consider myself a tree hugger and/or an environmentalist. Yet bear in mind that if every one of those 100 million cars in North America spilled a single drop of oil on the highway, that would equate 100 million drops of motor oil flushing down the storm drains and into all of our oceans, rivers, lakes, and aquifers. Tell me something, do you want motor oil mixed into your tap water every time you want to drink water or take a bath/shower?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think we'll run out of oil before tat happens. In any case, the cops apparently feel safe at ANY speed, under ANY conditions in a Crown Victoria. It's RWD, got a frame and civilians, driving them reasonably, report decent MPG. Maybe you could try one of those?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You forgot to mention that none of them are offered with a manual transmission and a turbo diesel engine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Neither is your 2002 Taurus. Life is about compromises.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

2002 Ford Taurus SEL's were offered with a manual transmission and a turbo diesel engine???

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 13 May 2005 18:17:56 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

india alone is responsable for 80% of world pollution then comes the ussr what the fuck are you crying over 2 drops of oil
lmfao
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes and with 200 million drops of motor oil on the ground, how many tons of oil does that add up to? Do the math retard.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's a ridiculous question, as no matter how many vehicles you own, you can only drive one at a time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes and while 10 of your other vehicles are sitting at home, motor oil and transmission fluid as well as radiator fluid are dripping underneath them and into the soil and storm drains.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Nuts. I have a Cougar, a Cutlass, a Sentra, a Lincoln, two Yamahas, a Suzuki, a Honda, a Dodge Ram, a firetruck and a Watchamacallit (has to be seen to be believed), none of them is leaking anything anywhere. It doesn't hurt anyone but me to own that many vehicles- the insurance is ridiculous.
The other gentleman has a point- one should not be required to carry liability insurance on every single vehicle. It would make far more sense to simply have one's *license* contingent with a liability policy. Poor drivers would have to pay more and they wouldn't be able to fudge the system by registering a vehicle in someone else's name (who has a better record). No insurance, no license. The economic penalties would be applied squarely where they belong- on the bad drivers.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Arthur Dent wrote:

I agree, but that system could only go so far. If something happens to your car while it is parked & the driver who hit you got away (or it was something else, like a tree limb fell on your car) nobody was driving, so Comprehensive & Collision would have to remain attached to the car. And even for liability, if the parking brake wasn't set and your car rolls down the hill & hits somebody, who pays? Legally it would be the last person who drove the car, but finding out who it was is non-trivial.
This is the insurance industry's explanation for why insurance is attached to the car. Still, I agree, it would make more sense for drivers to carry their own liability coverage, but car owners would need their own coverage anyway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Good points. Yes, comprehensive would have to remain with the vehicle, since it would be the vehicle itself that is being insured. A SMALL liability rider on the vehicle for freak accidents such as you describe should be relatively inexpensive. Statisticly (sp?) how often do things like that happen?
I actually carry extra liability coverage, in amounts of five to ten times the minimums...but that extra coverage only costs less than five dollars per year per vehicle.
Taking your points into account, my suggestion is still do-able and far more equitable than the current system in those areas where coverage is mandatory.
A nationwide mandatory liability policy on licenses would be a good thing. I think there are still some states where it is possible to carry no coverage at all on the vehicle.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Arthur Dent wrote:

I like it.

According to California's DMV, 40% of drivers in some areas (example: Rancho Cordova, a fairly well-off suburb of Sacramento) have no insurance, and another 40% have only the minimum (15/30/5, the lowest in the country). I take two lessons from this:
1) Carry the highest uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage you can afford, because there's a good chance you'll need it if you get hit.
2) Carry enough liability coverage to protect your assets. You wouldn't believe how many people I talk to who own houses worth $300k or even 500k, but carry the minimum coverage. If you make the 11:00 news -- and somebody does, at least once a week just in the Sacramento area -- who's going to wind up owning that house?
But back to your proposal. I like the idea of having the DMV enforce coverage, but you don't need to attach the insurance to the license to accomplish that. Many states -- NV, for one -- attach it to the car registration. If you let your insurance lapse, the DMV wants your plates back -- and any cop who runs the plate number will find it flagged as expired. They have a much higher compliance rate than we.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Absolutely. I was going to cut back my coverage from $500k...but it turned out that the extra cost was only a few dollars per year (less than $5)- definitely worth it. I don't worry about a lawsuit taking my property, I set up a trust to hold the real estate so it provides a level of insulation from that sort of thing (among other advantages).

That is precisely the thing I'd like to change. I live in such a state and must pay full premiums on every single vehicle for that reason. It is unfair and inequitable to be required to carry seperate policies on each vehicle when a single policy on the license would provide the necessary protection.
There are people with poor driving records who register their vehicle(s) in the names of others with better records in order NOT to pay the high premiums they ought to be paying as a consequence of their propensity to cause damage. (In some areas rates are calculated, at least in part, based on the address of the place of garaging, and it is not uncommon for people to fudge the system by reporting an address of a friend or relative who lives in an area where the rates are cheaper.) These are flaws in the system that could be rectified by my proposal. By attaching the major portion of coverage to the license, high-risk drivers would be forced to pay their own freight, and if they could not find (or afford to pay for) coverage appropriate to their risk level then they would not be allowed to drive. This would be beneficial in either reducing the number of high-risk drivers on the road and/or putting the cost of the damage they cause on the persons responsible.
In the vast majority of cases it is the driver and not the vehicle which is responsible for damages, it is a rare thing indeed for a vehicle to start itself up and drive off to cause an accident. (All humor-impared people can see me later for an explanation and complementary dope-slap.) At current count I own eleven vehicles (I think), but I can drive only one at a time. Why should I be required to carry full liability policies on vehicles that are not being driven? (Obviously, fleet owners who have many employees driving their vehicles would not be eligible for this type of program, though I should think that their costs could also be reduced by putting the majority of responsibility on the drivers themselves.) Why should you or I or anyone else have to shoulder the costs of the damages caused by Joe Reckless?
The more I think about this the more irate I become. It's time for a change.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

How much do you need to tow? The '92 BMW 535 I just bought is supposedly able to tow 3700lbs, which should be sufficient for most needs. It has good brakes, RWD with LSD and traction control, manual transmission, and decent mileage. According to the trip computer the previous owner averaged 20.4 MPG.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's a BMW and so it will by default cost big bucks to purchase used. It will also cost an arm and a leg to insure and to repair once anything goes awry.
Does it have a high compression engine? Does it require 92 octane gasoline? Gas or diesel?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.