#69 of 88 If anyone needs a laugh... by lemmer

Jun 08, 2006 (8:28 am)

#70 of 88 . by fintail

Jun 08, 2006 (8:55 am)

#71 of 88 Difficult To Compare M-B vs Caddilac V-8s by martian

Jun 25, 2006 (7:11 am)

Replies to this message:

• Mr_Shiftright (Jun 25, 2006 10:27 am)

#72 of 88 I think one reason... by andre1969

Jun 25, 2006 (9:48 am)

that disc brakes were delayed for so long is that they pretty much demand a power assist. With drum brakes, even a big battlecruiser driven by a little old lady could get slowed down without a power assist. I had a '67 Newport with a 383-2bbl, and a weight of an easy 4000 pounds. Drum brakes all around, and no power assist. It belonged to a little old lady before me, and if she was able to handle something like that for roughly 30 years, anybody should be able to!
 
With disc brakes though, even smaller cars really need a power assist in order to safely stop. Unless you're a body-builder with very strong leg muscles!
 
Now to be fair, most larger cars back then were equipped with power brakes. But IIRC, disc brakes were a $25-30 option, while the power boost was around $100. If they made all that stuff standard, they'd have had to raise their advertised prices and, well, we all know how cheap Detroit can be.
 
FWIW, the fact that disc brakes were optional, but seldom ordered, speaks volumes to the fact that by and large, the American buying public just didn't care. They cared about how big it was, how cushy it was, and how fast it could accelerate, but not how fast it could stop.
 
Here's something that puzzles me with the newer cars, though. On some trim styles of the same model line they offer 4-wheel discs, but on some they still have drums in the rear. For example, the Taurus/Sable wagons have disc brakes in back, but the sedans have drums. And with the Stratus/Sebring sedans, the V-6 models have 4-wheel discs, while the 4-cyl have drums in back.
 
Wouldn't it be cheaper in the long run to just make them 4-wheel disc, across the board? I can't imagine that they're really saving much in manufacturing costs by offering it two different ways. And I really don't see how a disc brake setup should be any more expensive than a drum brake. If anything, it actually seems LESS complicated to me! It's much easier to change the pads on a disc-brake car, there are fewer springs and little BS-parts in the assembly, and just by design, disc brakes are self-adjusting, so you eliminate those annoying little adjusters that the drum brakes had which didn't work half the time.
 
About the only thing I can think of, in the argument for simplicity these days, is that rear drums are inherently designed to function well as an emergency brake. Just pull the handle or push the footbrake, and a cable pulls the leading shoe against the drum. It's not easy (or maybe not even possible) to make something mechanical like that to cause a caliper to push out and and press the pads against the rotor, so they have to design a miniature drum setup in the rear wheels, which acts as an emergency brake. And supposedly, if you rarely use your emergency/parking brake and the system gets muffed up, it's alot more expensive to fix than the old fashioned drum setup, where at the most the only thing screwed up is a couple of cables.

#73 of 88 Re: Difficult To Compare M-B vs Caddilac V-8s [martian] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jun 25, 2006 (10:27 am)

Replying to: martian (Jun 25, 2006 7:11 am)

#74 of 88 Wow!! What a topic! by reallandyacht

Jul 09, 2006 (12:17 pm)

Being the current owner of a '70 DeVille and having driven 2 '68 M.B Limos - I can say this (keep in mind I have ALWAYS loved the 450SL) I turned down an opportunity to get a '73 450SL convertible in MUCH better shape than my Caddy convertible. They wanted my Cadillac and $3,000.00 for the SL ....
 
.... of course I would hate missing out on flying Caddy hub caps when hitting an on ramp too fast with almost 20 foot of DeVille sailing around a tight curve!!

Replies to this message:

• Mr_Shiftright (Jul 09, 2006 2:56 pm)
  • reallandyacht (Jul 09, 2006 7:24 pm)
    • Mr_Shiftright (Jul 10, 2006 7:37 am)
• andre1969 (Jul 10, 2006 6:30 am)

#75 of 88 Re: Wow!! What a topic! [reallandyacht] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jul 09, 2006 (2:56 pm)

Replying to: reallandyacht (Jul 09, 2006 12:17 pm)

You shouldn't have to give any money with your Caddy to get a 450SL, especially an early one. They are worth about the same--they might actually owe you $3,000, no kidding.
 
Besides, all you'd be getting is a smaller car that eats just as much gas as your Caddy and is 3X more expensive to repair.
 
I think Benz performed the $100 bill test on all 450SLs, to see how well they stuck to the upholstery

Replies to this message:

• reallandyacht (Jul 09, 2006 7:24 pm)
  • Mr_Shiftright (Jul 10, 2006 7:37 am)

#76 of 88 Re: Wow!! What a topic! [Mr_Shiftright] by reallandyacht

Jul 09, 2006 (7:24 pm)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jul 09, 2006 2:56 pm)

RE: a smaller car that eats just as much gas
 
Since the tune up and carb rebuild I get 13.8 MPG
(before that it was under 9 MPG)
 
my '06 Escape Limited (V6) only gets 17.4 MPG
 
For a little more than 3 1/2 MPG it's not worth parking the yacht unless the top has to be up - it has too many blind spots.
 
As for the Caddy's worth - it was rough compared to the SL.
 
That offer was before almost a grand in electrical, new exhaust, water pump, a complete tune up, carb rebuild, a bunch of body work & paint, as well as new tires and a LOT of detailing .
 
It was almost tempting!

Replies to this message:

• Mr_Shiftright (Jul 10, 2006 7:37 am)

#77 of 88 Re: Wow!! What a topic! [reallandyacht] by andre1969

Jul 10, 2006 (6:30 am)

Replying to: reallandyacht (Jul 09, 2006 12:17 pm)

#78 of 88 Re: Wow!! What a topic! [reallandyacht] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jul 10, 2006 (7:37 am)

Replying to: reallandyacht (Jul 09, 2006 7:24 pm)