g741.org

JB,

From your comment in the "Is there lead in OD paint" thread you mentioned the wonderful superior brakes of our beloved M37s. Did you ever see this ad that Dodge put out back in the day? I think I posted it before, but in retrospect it's kind of funny considering how often M37 brakes seem to need attention.

Enjoy!
bob

LOL

The M37 uses the same brake shoes as the 3/4 ton WC series in WW2, so how would they last six times longer? I think the ad copy writer got carried away.

Joe

Joe,

The key word is "similar vehicles" in that ad. They're not comparing the M37 brakes to the WC brakes........but to the brakes of other manufacturer's similar vehicles. Of course that means nothing, but most ads do. In fairness to Chrysler I think all drum brakes were pretty crappy back in the day...........at least I've never heard anyone praise them.

regards,
bob

Bob
Most all older vehicles with drum brakes don't measure up to newer vehicles with disk brakes.
At over 6,500 lbs., and the skinny brake shoes, M37's are, as Ralph Nader used to say:
"Unsafe at any speed.".
Jerry

No argument with disc brakes being better than drum brakes, though the look of the disc brakes in the ad looks like a nightmare to repair. The modern ones have evolved in simplicity of replacement, and I'm all about simplicity. Good engineering to me is easier repair with common tools, and ability to be repaired in less than ideal situations.

Joe

m37jarhead wrote:Bob
Most all older vehicles with drum brakes don't measure up to newer vehicles with disk brakes.
At over 6,500 lbs., and the skinny brake shoes, M37's are, as Ralph Nader used to say:
"Unsafe at any speed.".
Jerry

Given the similarities in the rear axle designs, that label might be more appropriate for the M151 MUTT instead of the M37.

The first generation disc brakes in the ad are Ausco-Lambert, which were exclusive to Chrysler, and were available as a four-wheel system from 1950 through 1954. They worked somewhat inverse to the modern disc brake (an English Dunlop design, that first appeared in the U. S. on the front wheels of some 1963 Studebakers), in that the outer shell was like a double-sided, inward-facing flywheel with cooling ribs on the outside, and the outward-facing friction material was on two discs that were forced apart to press against the inner faces of the outer shell.

Based on the photos, it appears that Chrysler's military prototype T-237 (1947), T53 (1949), and T53E1 (1950) 3/4-ton 4x4 trucks all were equipped with a version of these Ausco-Lambert disc brakes (mounted on the outside of the wheels!), and all were designed as replacements for the WC series BEFORE the G-741 trucks were created. While these disc brakes would have been a big improvement over the conventional drums on our trucks, the cost and field servicing issues probably killed the design. Lucky for us, because as hard as good drums are to find now, the Ausco-Lambert disc brake parts have probably been unobtainable for many, many years.

The ad mentions that crown imperial comes with disk brakes, but mine definitely had drums on all 4 wheels. I installed the front disk kit myself several years ago.

isaac_alaska wrote:The ad mentions that crown imperial comes with disk brakes, but mine definitely had drums on all 4 wheels. I installed the front disk kit myself several years ago.

Nice.

What year is your Crown Imperial?

1963, currently waiting for me to pull the heads and address a few issues, it was running good enough to do burnouts on dry blacktop after being parked for 15 years, but when i had the intake manifold and gasket plate off i noticed that two of the lifter rods were bent and laying on top...so only running on 6 cylinders. I guess with a 413 you've got power to spare. Square steering wheel, dash mounted flip lever for "park," and it came standard with push-button shifting

You also have to take their claims in light of average highway speeds of the day. Most people putt-putting around in the country were doing 30ish, not screaming at 55mph at redlining their M37. Mine are fine at 25 to 30 and even when driving to a show across town I only run 40 to 45 and at that speed everyone is BEHIND me, not in front.

refit1701 wrote:You also have to take their claims in light of average highway speeds of the day. Most people putt-putting around in the country were doing 30ish, not screaming at 55mph at redlining their M37. Mine are fine at 25 to 30 and even when driving to a show across town I only run 40 to 45 and at that speed everyone is BEHIND me, not in front.

I envy M37 owners that have the courage to use theirs as daily drivers. I like easy drives to Safeway, local shows and
occasionally picking up the grandson from school. Most of the major city streets around here are four to six lanes with 45MPH limits.
That means most everyone is doing 50 to 55MPH racing to the next red light... where I usually catch them in my M37.

Given that, I give them plenty of room ahead because there's always some moron that slams on their disk brakes, 10 feet in front of me to make a turn. One of these days they will have an LU-4 sticking into their rear window.

Jerry

m37jarhead wrote: Given that, I give them plenty of room ahead because there's always some moron that slams on their disk brakes, 10 feet in front of me to make a turn. One of these days they will have an LU-4 sticking into their rear window.

Jerry

Here in Michigan, that would be sufficient evidence for you to get the ticket for the accident.

Elwood wrote:

m37jarhead wrote: Given that, I give them plenty of room ahead because there's always some moron that slams on their disk brakes, 10 feet in front of me to make a turn. One of these days they will have an LU-4 sticking into their rear window.

Jerry

Here in Michigan, that would be sufficient evidence for you to get the ticket for the accident.

Maybe we should all get dash cams?