[SOLVED] Drum brakes - do you disconnect the parking brake cable?

It should cost less than a hundred bucks for shoes, cylinders, and hardware . New drums would cost maybe a little over a hundred more. You can save a l ot of dough by doing the job yourself. I enjoy taking my time while working on brakes - by myself. Less when somebody is "helping."

Wow. What a difference in prices from the Toyota dealer! It's not half, it's not a third, or a fifth - it's one tenth the price!

The only thing I need now is to know the OEM shoe friction ratings.

I'd be perfectly happy with just-as-good friction pads as OEM at those RockAuto prices of basically $12 per "something".

I guess I need to call RockAuto in the morning at 1-608-661-1376 (Wisconsin time zone) to figure out two critical things:

1. How many shoes come for (one?, two? four?)
2. What's the cold/hot friction rating?

It's shocking that Toyota didn't know the friction rating, and RockAuto doesn't know the friction rating based on their web page (admittedly good prices).

The friction rating is the *most* important thing about a brake shoe - nothing else even matters if they are a worse friction rating than what you want.

And yet, the RockAuto page lists shoe after shoe after shoe after shoe after shoe (Centric, Bosch, Wagner, ACDelco, RayBestos, PowerStop, Monroe, BeckArnley, Bendix, etc.) and not one of them specifies the most important thing about a brake shoe!

WTF? It's impossible to buy brake pads or shoes without knowing the friction rating. Who on earth can possibly compare two brake shoes without that critical information?

It's not like a brake shoe has any other major job but friction.

The higher the number the stronger the friction (SAE J866a): E = 0.25-0.35 F = 0.35-0.45 G = 0.45-0.55 H = 0.55-0.65

Given RockAuto and Toyota don't seem to tell people the pad's friction rating, I have to wonder ... do people really buy friction materials knowing nothing about their cold & hot friction coefficients?

I have 358000km on the original rear brakes on my Ranger - and the shoes had over half lining left when I last checked them about 15000km ago. I've had the new shoes for 5 years, and the original owner had them for 4 years before he sold me the truck - - -

Actually it does not take a LOT of scoring to fail a drum - requiring it to be turned. Then there are two different "fail" measurements - there is a max wear and a max turn. If it is worn past a certain limit it must be replaced, and there is a limit you can turn it to - usually

2 different measurements.

I believe thre are quality aftermarket sources at a fair bit less.

You do not need to know the ratings - just buy "oem replacement" - they WILL be the right stuff. (there are cheaper qualities available - usually sold as "economy") Premium shoes and oem replacement will both be VERY close toidentical. In almost 50yuears as a mechanic Inever once had to "match" friction materials for "stock" brake replacement.

You do NOT need to know the ratings. Buy their OEM quality shoes and the manufacturer has done the homework for you. it will meet or excede OEM spec - which is all you need or want.

They are virtually ALWAYS sourced as a set of 4 - I've never seen shoes sold individually.

You REALLY don't need that - it's not a race car.

That's because it is generally not required for them (or you) to know the rating.

If they are OEM quality they WILL beright.

They never do. Every one of those manufacturers produce oem quality shoes, as wellas "economy" parts. You want OEM from Wagner, Centric, Raybestos, or Bendix - not familiar with BeckArnley - but have heard good things about their clutches - don't know PowerStop or Monroe - and AC Delco was good when they were a part of GM - but I think it's just a "brand" now - so no idea. No faith in anything Bosch myself - but they MAY make a perfectly adequate product.

Every day of the year - I've NEVER , other than on these newsgroups where "armchair experts" abound, heard of checking the friction rating of replacement friction material for standard street vehicles - and never did for navigational rallye vehicles either. That's a "track" thing. Don't worry about it - just buy the "oem quality" or better shoes.

I respectfully disagree with you - but I agree with you that if you buy from someone you *trust* (e.g., the dealership or your best friend who works at an auto parts store), then you don't need to worry about friction ratings because *they* worry about the friction rating for you.

But let's face it. A brake shoe has one and only one primary job. And that's friction.

If the friction rating of the shoe is, say, EF, and you buy FF, you're fine, but if you buy EE, then you're getting a shoe that has lower friction coefficients than the OEM manufacturer stated.

Now, *after* you get the right friction rating, there's more to the story (e.g., dust, noise, warranty, price, etc.), but if you don't know the OEM friction rating, then it's impossible to correctly buy brake shoes.

You can get *lucky*. But you are just guessing.

We're both saying the same thing, which is that the friction rating (which, by law, is printed on *every* USA pad) will meet or exceed the OEM spec if you buy from a reliable source who would, we hope, refuse to sell you a brake pad *lower* than the OEM spec.

Let's hope that's the case for mom and pop - but for me - I trust in the friction rating, since it's printed on *every* shoe, it isn't hard to find (if the shoe is in your hands).

I did some more homework by calling the local parts stores (I had called the dealer first) who tell me that they sell them for less than twenty bucks for a set of four.

The wheel cylinders are cheap also, at about 16 bucks per cylinder and at about 7 bucks for the repair kit so I'll get a couple of those too.

Let's just respectfully disagree on whether I should match or exceed the friction rating of the OEM brake shoe.

In all my years with disc brakes, I've never bought a pad without knowing the friction rating ahead of time (usually FF or GG - but mostly FF) and I would never put on a pad that doesn't meet or exceed the OEM friction rating.

I agree that if I buy Toyota shoes from the Toyota dealership, that the friction rating will be correct as it will be the OEM friction rating, whatever that is.

So if I buy from the dealer, I don't need to know anything because I would be trusting the dealer to give me the correct shoes.

If I buy from Rock Auto, then I have to make the choice based on the friction rating first and foremost.

It's not like friction isn't an important thing for a brake shoe.

That is true. If that is true that is true. It's not always true even if they say it's true. I'll trust the two letters printed on the shoe itself.

You seem to be cognizant of "branding" (e.g., AT&T is just a brand name, it's no longer the same company as it was). Brands have value, but you know, from oil filters and batteries and tires, etc., that they brand all sorts of shit just to get more money for the same thing.

Oil filters are notorious for that. You have to dig deeply to figure out who *really* makes that oil filter and what it looks like inside (e.g., paper backflow valves, glued pleats, rubber versus paper stops, etc.).

Branding is bullshit for the most part.

What I care about are friction ratings.

After that, I care about stuff that I will never get the truth on, such as dusting, and noise, but that's just a fact of life that you can't get that information except from enthusiasts (e.g., Jurid FF pads dust like crazy but PBR FF pads don't ... go figure).

The *first* spec on friction material is *always* friction.

After that, you generally don't get the truth even though plenty of other stuff matters - but the friction rating is *printed* on ever shoe so it's unconscionable not to take it into account when purchasing shoes.

Otherwise you're just guessing.

I've seen people put Wagner EE pads on a car spec'd for FF OEM pads, and they didn't even know it.

They showed a picture of the pads and I had to tell them that the pads didn't even meet OEM specs.

The sad thing is that they could have had Textar or Axxis pads for about the same price that were FF or even GG.

I'll repeat that the PRIMARY job of friction material is friction. Hence the friction coefficient is printed on all USA pads and shoes.

There's a *reason* for that. You can certainly *trust* to luck - but I prefer to read the shoe. :)

I don't disagree with your experience now that I've done some homework. It's amazing how *long* brake shoes last, at least on the rear.

I suspect I'd get double the mileage that I saw if the Toyota brakes would only wear evenly. Most people on the Toyota forums get more than 175K miles but this truck was driven in very hilly country for more than a decade.

The problem here is that *none* of us are referencing an actual manufacturer's specification.

I looked up the specs for a scored rotor when I had a Lexus LS 400 in the early nineties where I was shocked at the spec. As I recall, it was thicker than a dime, and maybe even a dime and a half as I recall, for it to fail the rotor.

I didn't look up drums at the time (it had disc brakes all around), but I think we're all talking out of our asses (me included!) unless and until we dig up a real spec from the manufacturer.

It's usually *hard* to find the scoring spec; it's a lot easier to find the thickness and runout specs, so I'm not saying it's an easy spec to find.

I agree.

The RockAuto site someone quoted had an axle for a lot less than twenty bucks, so Toyota is about ten times aftermarket.

I called the local parts store and they have FF friction-rated shoes (I asked them to read me what it says on the shoe) for $17 per axle.

At that price, it's not worth shopping around by price - but only for the friction rating.

I haven't found the friction rating for the OEM shoes yet, so it's impossible to buy shoes without that information. When I call for the friction rating I get tons of bullshit about the pad material where it's meaningless without the friction rating.

I mean, a brake pad has a primary job, and that's not dust or noise but friction. First comes friction. Then we can talk about dust or noise or warranty.

But friction comes first. Without the right friction rating, it's worthless.

I think we actually agree in that I completly agree with you that if the friction rating of the pads I get is equal to the OEM spec, then I am where I want to be.

I also agree that we can *trust* the guy who sells me the friction material that he wouldn't sell me a friction material that didn't meet OEM spec.

It's sort of like when buying tires, Costco won't sell you an S rated tire if the original tires that came on the vehicle are an H rated tire. They don't want to sell you anything less than OEM.

I get all that. So I agree with you.

However ... I like to know my ingredients, so to speak.

SO I like to know what the friction rating is for the OEM pads/shoes, and for the pads/shoes that I buy.

You really can't fault me for wanting that information. It's just like reading the ingredients on a label where the ingredients are required to be listed in order by law.

Same with the friction ratings.

It's been over a decade, so I don't remember ther exact specs, but I did government safwety checks as well as servicing LOTS of vehicles (including 4runners and Land Cruisers) and gouges in both rotors and drums do not have to be terribly deep or wide to mandate resurfacing/replacement.

not hard at all. here's one:

and another: see page 402 at : "If scoring or light grooves cannot be removed by hand (with emery cloth) the drum MUST be refinished or replaced"

There is NO ALLOWABLE AMOUNT OF GROOVING ALLOWED ON A DRUM when replacing friction m,aterial- PERIOD.

read ALL of:

No, your best friend whoworks at the auto parts store may be as clueless as you are. BUY OEM SPEC PARTS and you can't go wrong.

OEM SPEC parts WILL be equal to or excedingOEM specs.

With pads you worry about dust - not so with drums/shoes.

Soare you.

No, they will sell you what you are willing to pay for. If you want "economy" friction, they willsell you "economy" friction - which M

Then ask to see the factory shoe at the dealer and read the rating.

The "monroe premium" shoes I have "on the shelf" for my ranger are EE on all 4 shoes. The "certified" semi-metallic pads I have "onthe shelf" for the ranger are EF

Since the rear brakes basically "go along for the ride" unless you are hauling a load, the friction rating isn't TERRIBLY critical anyway

-

LikeI said - stupidly cheap - not worth rebuilding unless the cyls are not available.

Didn't say you shouldn't. Just LISTEN to what I'm saying. BUY OE#M SPEC and you GET OEM SPEC.

Listen to one of the most experienced wrenches on this newsgroup. I've wrenched, I've been service manager, and I've taught the trade at both secondary school and trade levels. Since 1969.

ANd if you buy OEM SPEC aftermarket p[arts, they will br too. What do you not understand about OEM SPEC????

No, you choose OEM SPEC from a TRUSTED MANUFACTURER - no matter who you buy from.

And who says the friction material is accurately marked???? You have no idea where the friction material came from, and if it meets the spec stamped on it. It is almost CERTAINLY sourced fromChina - and likely assembled on the shoe in China, regardless of the brand, and China will counterfeit anything, given the chance. This is where a "trusted manufacturer" comes in, as they do "quality control" and assure the product meets spec.

You could have FF stamped on a thich chunk of cardboard on an "xyz" brand part and it might not even meet the loweast spec.

They don't mean SQUAT if you can't trust the brand. See where I'm coming from???

ANd over half the "enthusiasts" don't know shit from shinola - they just listen to other "enthusiasts" or "armchair experts"

It's printed on the friction material by the manufacturer - can you trust the manufacturer????? If so, trust the manufacturer to provide OEM quality. If not, the ratings don't mean shit.

Like I said - BUY QUALITY and you are not guessing any more than you are doing it your way.

Correct - there was no difference undernormal driving conditions - they likely didn't wear the same, but they stopped the car at all legal speeds under normal load conditions

They bopught "economy" pads - and the whiz-bang enthusiast pads may have been no better than what they bought,

Then go to the dealer and check the OEM parts they have in stock, and you will KNOW the spec. Then order the OEM quality parts from Rock, and if they are sub-standard, send them back. No rocket science. - unless you've pissed off the dealership parts department and they won't do anything for you.

I had customers that I'd refuse to do anything for because they were cheapassed pricks who you could never satisfy, and/or they were know-it-all know-nothings that argued with everything you told them.

If you are that kind of person (and it's looking a bit that way because you don't listen to experience - you "know better" )- then good luck and it looks good on you.

Yep, a mechanical aptitude is a necessity. I spent 50 years in the trade. That said, I had the practical experience but I also had the book learning. Having both helps.

Apprenticeship, worked for me.

You're shopping in all the wrong places.

Are you *qualified* to judge?

Someone is way too anal to be a mechanic.

Best you toddle off and pay those inflated prices. THE OEM Toyota ones will be exactly the same friction rating as the ones you are replacing.

There is no such thing as OEM quality without having the OEM specs to compare against. Otherwise it's just a gimmick.

There's no way for you to know if it's OEM quality if it's not to OEM specs. Just because they *say* it in a billion web sites, doesn't mean it is.

Specs are fact. Marketing words are bullshit.

EE sucks. Steel on steel has a coefficient of E. Seriously. Look it up.

Again, E is atrocious. Steel on stell is E. Look it up. F is good.

Unfortunatly, there is a HUGE RANGE between E and F and even within E and F themselves. Such is the spec.

But I'll tell you that I've never once in my life put a crappy E pad on any disc brake. E is absolutely horrifically terrible. It's no better than steel on steel.

F is just getting started.

I've never done drum brakes before though.

This may very well be true because I must have replaced the fronts a few times already on this vehicle so I don't disagree with you. I'm going to do the front pads also, so I am looking for what their friction ratings are.

The main problem with cylinders is that if I don't go OEM, I won't know the quality of the cylinders. So I may end up putting worse cylinders in, when their may be nothing wrong with the current ones.

Then again, maybe all cylinders are just fine in terms of quality. I don't know. That's the homework I need to do as I've never done drums before.

We don't disagree. We just don't agree on what you trust & what I trust.

To me, IMHO, there is no such thing as "OEM SPEC". It's marketing bullshit.

Maybe it's oem spec. Maybe it's not. Who is to say? You trust marketing more than I do.

I trust *real* specs. Like the friction coefficient. That's a real spec. Not marketing bullshit.

Why do you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM spec *is* the OEM spec?

I don't disagree with anything you've said, and, in fact, I agree with almost everything you've said. Our disagreements are only in how we interpret things like scoring and what you term "oem spec".

I completely comprehend what you're saying. The main difference is that I trust specs more than you seem to. And you seem to trust what I think is marketing bullshit more than I do.

It's not a disagreement in principle as if it truly was OEM spec then it's OEM spec. I get that - but I don't believe it just because they said it.

Have you seen oil filters taken apart? I have. They *all* meet OEM spec. But some are better than others. A lot better.

Why would you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM spec *is* the OEM spec?

There is nothing you could ever say to me that I don't comprehend. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Really.

It's not a matter of comprehension.

It's a matter of trust in marketing bullshit or not. You trust what I call marketing bullshit much more than I trust it.

That's the only difference that I can see where we disagree.

If I buy a food that says "all natural", what the f*ck does that mean? If it says "more doctors recommend it", what the f*ck does that mean?

Do you know that acetominophen (aka Tylenol) is freaking dangerous? The LD50 on Tylenol is so f****ng close to the therapeutic dose that it's dangerous stuff compared to Aspirin.

Yet there is the J&J campaign to convince idiot consumers that "more doctors recommend tylenol" which is a bullshit marketing statistic.

Same here with the "meets OEM specs" bullshit. Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't.

What matters is the OEM spec. Not the marketing bullshit.

We don't disagree. The only place we disagree is that you can't believe anyone would not believe in the marketing bullshit.

SO you say I don't "comprehend" but I do comprehend. It's trust. Not comprehension where we differ.

Why would you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM spec *is* the OEM spec?

Let's drop this as I AGREE with you that if it truly is "oem spec" then "Oem spec" is fine.

Did you know Apple said that their phones were X Ghz but they halved that in a year? Companies don't always tell the truth.

You seem to believe them. I don't.

That's the only difference. Why do you deny me the right to double check that what they call an OEM spec *is* the OEM spec?

They have to meet the standard and I "presume" it's enforced by law. Maybe it's not - but I presume that the friction rating is correct.

What's odd is you believe a marketing bullshit claim of "meets oem spec" without it saying what that spec is, and yet you question a government mandated friction test under specified circumstances.

I think that's odd in that it's reversed from normal logic. There's nothing wrong with your logic - as it has to do with trust.

You trust marketing more than you trust the government mandate. I'm the opposite on trust.

I trust the friction test, specifically the SAE J866A test procedure:

Here's a general description of the friction ratings CDEFGH

What's odd is that you don't trust a government mandated standard test, but at the same time, you trust a mere marketing term on a web site.

That's fine. You're allowed to trust marketing more than government mandated specs - but it's the opposite for me on trust.

We only differ in what we trust.

I can't run my own tests like the police did here:

The brand is meaningless. What matters is what's *inside* the oil filter. The brand is just the paint on the outside.

We differ greatly in whom we trust.

I trust in specs. You trust in brands.

Neither one of us is wrong - we just trust differently.

I agree with you that the 'boy racers' out there who think seafoam is a solution from God himself don't know much - but when it comes to "dusting", it's pretty reliable when everyone with the same make and model and year you have says that a certain Jurid pad will dust while the PBR pad won't dust (where PBR and Axxis are the same pad - it's only the marketing paint on the outside of the box that allows them to sell Axxis pads at a higher price than PBR).

Do you see what I'm getting at?

I personally called the marketing organization for Axxis who, interestingly, has a different channel than PBR (even though they're the

*same* pads!), and they gave me the full scoop.

Marketing bullshit 101.

You are not wrong in trusting marketing far more than I do, and I am not wrong in trusting in actual measured specs more so that marketing words.

What's funny is that you don't trust a government mandated SAE test, which has clear conditions, while you do trust some blurb in thousands upon thousands of web sites to be correct.

I find that odd but there's nothing wrong with how you trust web site blurbs more than I trust them, nor that you trust government mandated SAE tests less than I trust them.

It's all how you and I handle trust.

You trust marketing far more than I do.

I *know* that a PBR pad is far less money than an Axxis pad and yet, they're exactly the same pad - only marketed differently.

Wanna know something funny? They both have the same markings on the side.

They *have* to have the same markings. It's the law.

The one place they can't lie, is in the markings.

You trust marketing more than I do.

We don't disagree other than you think E is quality and I know E is almost as bad as it gets. E is no better than steel on steel for friction.

E is no better than steel on steel. Look it up. I'm not joking.

Anyone who says "economy" or "performance" pads is falling prey to marketing bullshit.

There is no such thing as an "economy" pad.

There is a pad that has a certain spec and that's it. If you pay a lot for it or if you pay a little for it, the spec didn't change.

Remember, the "performance" Axxis pad is the *same* pad as the economy "PBR" pad.

It's all marketing bullshit. The numbers on the pad are *exactly* the same because they have to be. They're the same pad.

You don't know the Toyota dealer in my town. They're assholes. They're the worst. They'd KILL me if I told them I just wanted to *look* at their pads. I'm serious (well, not about killing me). But they'd tell me to go take a hike.

Only at a local auto parts store would they bother, but only if they don't have to open the package in a destructive way.

Anyway, I appreciate your advice but that doesn't mean I trust what you trust which are the words "meets oem" more than I trust actual facts (which are measured and tested friction ratings).

We each put trust in different things: a. You trust marketing more than specs b. I trust specs more than marketing

Neither of us is right or wrong - it's just we differ in whom we trust.

Um... you just proved my point. There's no spec for scoring and grooving in that PDF.

And in *anything* on a car, there is no such thing as 0 tolerance. It just doesn't exist. 0 may be 0.090 or it might be 0.001 but it's never going to be 0 on anything.

Specifically "free of scoring" is not a spec for how thick the scoring can be. (Yes, I know you *intimate* zero, but 0 inches is not the OEM spec, as I've seen OEM specs when I looked. They're hard to find, but they're nowhere near 0 inches).

I'm not chastising you for finding that PDF, as I know it's nearly impossible to find any manufacturer's spec for how thick a groove or scoring can be before it's rejected - but when you find the spec (as I have in the past), you'll be shocked how deep and wide the grooves can be and still be within manufacturers' specs.

Um... this proves point also, which is that there is no spec in there for scoring or grooving other than 0, which is a ridiculous number that isn't the manufacturer's spec.

Again, I'm not chastising you for finding out what I already knew to be the case, because I too looked and it's not easy to find a spec but when you find it, you'll be amazed how wide the grooves can be and still be within the manufacturers' specs.

Ch 8 Drum Brakes wasn't visible to me when I looked.

Again, this proves my point. Unless you actually believe 0 is the spec, but I already know, from my past searches years ago, that it's huge, so it's not even close to zero.

I see your words and I believe it says that but it's not a manufacturer's spec.

Now, I did look it up only for the rotors because the vehicle didn't have drum brakes, so, maybe drums are different - but that doesn't change the fact that none of these are Toyota specs.

Um. Again, it proves my point, saying only that "Minor pitting and scoring are acceptable as long as the grooves are not too deep and can be removed by resurfacing."

As in the other PDFs, that implies 0 but it's just not 0 IMHO. I may be wrong for drums, because what I looked up was the manufacturer's spec for scoring of rotors - but the scoring limit for rotors is *huge* so why would drums be different?

Maybe drums *are* zero (I'm not saying they're not); all I'm saying is that you and I both know that it's damn hard to find the *manufacturers* spec for the depth and width of a scoring that will fail a drum.

To be clear, I'm not trying to argue with you as you found exactly what I found, which is that it's damn hard to find the manufacturers' spec for the size of scoring where it's *easy* to find their spec for the diameter and other things.

That last article does say the following: "One way to tell if the surface finish is in the recommended range of 80 microinches or less"

Ok. That's 80 millionths of an inch, or 0.000080 inches, but that's the overall "roughness" factor and not scoring per se. And, notice it's not 0 simply because nothing in a vehicle is at 0 tolerance.

My main comment stands which is that, at least for rotors, scoring has to be huge to fail a rotor, according to the specs I don't have now but that I unearthed in the past from a vehicle manufacturer.

Whether rotor scoring is similar is unknown to me but it's a good question of what Toyota things is a scoring limit. But really this is theoretical since I'm keeping the drums as they're in fine shape with no "visible" scoring.

There are no asbestos brake linings available so everything else now is similar and adequate.