Skip to main content

Reply to "My Speedster replica brakes suck"

I'm (slowly) learning that nearly everybody tends to make decisions for one reason, then rationalize those decisions with something that sounds better. I do it a lot without even realizing it-- and if I do it long enough, I start to think I arrived at my decision because of the rationalized reason rather than the real one.

It's my suspicion that we (collectively) do that a lot, in regards to a lot of the "good enough" arguments we have here. Rear brakes are one of those things-- there's nobody anywhere that will argue that discs aren't better, but no shortage of arguments as to why drum brakes are "good enough".

Original 356s had drums on all 4 corners-- not because they were better, but because they embraced a proven 1950s technology. Nobody is arguing that we should do the same thing, because it's universally agreed that discs are better, and on the front it's a low-cost replacement. Everybody knows that the majority of braking force is in the front. In a normal vehicle, that's perfect, because the bulk of the weight is there as well. That's not the case with a speedster. These cars carry very little weight over the front axle, so the rear becomes a more important part of the equation. 

I know my car is a rolling anachronism, but driving it briskly is one of my great pleasures in life. Doing that with brakes that I'm not 100% sure about seems like rationalizing that Russian Roulette isn't really that dangerous, as there's only a 1 in 6 chance the chamber has a cartridge in it. I can understand skipping the big engine, or deciding that 4-lug wheels are good enough (they are).

But economizing on brakes is not something I'm ever going to think is a good idea, no matter how it gets dressed up for church.  

Last edited by Stan Galat
×
×
×
×
×