9" or 10" drum

[Ranger44]

I figured all of 4x4 Ranger's had 10" drums. Well mine are finned.....and the 10" drums with the exception of the aerostar are smooth. So I'm going to assume I have the 9". Soooo...is the upgrade to 10" drums worth it?

 

[90rangersuper]

mine are finned and i have the 10 inch brakes, i dont think 10 in pads would fit on a 9 inch drum cuz i bought the pads for the 10 inch drum and i have had them on now for about 6 months no problem

 

[Mutant Pony]

The majority of Rangers are 9". I think maybe the 4.0s all got 10". It was an option from the start that not many people opted for.
If you are running larger than stock tires you could use the extra braking. I installed the 10" in all my Rangers and didn't have any problems. I does require pulling the axle shafts though.

 

[tanbuddy]

does 10 inch drum measure 10 inches at the inside or outside of the drum? Ill measure mine tomorrow, i have a rear layinng around i could sell the backing plates and stuff off of it if u need it.

 

[Mutant Pony]

10" inside. On the outside of the drum wil be: 10.090 max. dia.

 

[Donnie strickland]

from the TRS Tech Library:

Rear:
The Ranger uses a 9-inch rear drum. Limited slip rear axles and vehicles with a GVWR over 4580 pounds use a 10-inch drum.

 

[Ranger44]

So the actual inside of the drum should measure 10"? Hmmm. I'll remeasure and double check.

Yeah the axles come out. I could just get the backing plates and buy everything else new right?

 

[crbnunit]

The 10" finned drum uses wider shoes than the non finned 10". They are just bigger, better brakes. I have the 10" finned drums but my axle came off of a Sploder. I'd say if you are going to the trouble to change brakes, switch to discs. The 9" brakes are fine.

 

[tanbuddy]

If u want the backing plates i can probablly pull them off my old rear if u cant find any locally. pm me if u still want them

 

[Mutant Pony]

So the actual inside of the drum should measure 10"? Hmmm. I'll remeasure and double check.

Yeah the axles come out. I could just get the backing plates and buy everything else new right?

Yes, for the most part. It is hard to find the E-brake strut. Many places will tell you that you can't get that but, I have bought them.
10" brakes were optional on all Rangers. Most of the Gen Is had 9" though.
The upgrade to 10" was very noticable in both trucks. Mostly on BIG hills. If you live in flat land and run stock tires you'll never notice a difference.

 

[Ranger44]

I had the 9" brakes. I'll stick with them, and look for a set of dual pistion calipers and steering knuckles. Mine I was trying to sell were swipped, along with a bunch of other shit.

I may look for a another set and paint them up again. There is a 96 that was rolled nearby. He may part it out. We'll see.

 

[Captain Ledd]

One thing I found interesting about the 9" and 10" ranger drums is the widths.. The 9" shoes are damn near 2x the width of the 10" shoes. I was rather amazed at how skinny the 10" shoes were. At least thats what the parts guy said they were when he showed me the difference between the 2.

I'm willing to bet if you compared braking power they'd turn out to be surprisingly equal.

 

[JohnPi]

I'm willing to bet if you compared braking power they'd turn out to be surprisingly equal.

There are two reasons why I think this is probably not true:

1) The "Common Sense" Answer: The old saying (at least here on TRS): Why would Ford increase complexity with their brakes if there wasn't a real advantage to be had? When you look in marketing brochures, they don't really tell you the diameter of brake parts, just something like "Front discs and rear drums." It's cheaper to have less parts in inventory (less engineering, less overhead, etc.).

2) The "Math Based" Answer: Drum brakes work on the lever arm principal. Force at a distance. Since torque = force * distance, the farther out from the center of the axle the shoe engages the drum, the greater the opposing force is on the wheel's inertia.

 

[MAKG]

Mostly on BIG hills. If you live in flat land and run stock tires you'll never notice a difference.

If your brakes are fading, you're not using them correctly.

If I can descend Mt. Evans with no brake fade, you can descend anything, given correct technique.

Captain Ledd, your parts guy got the shoes switched. The 10 inch brakes are ENORMOUS in every dimension compared to 9 inch.

But too much braking power means you lock up the rears and spin out. That's what RABS is for, but no competent engineer wants to engineer an RABS failure mode that kills the occupants. This means you'll have to compensate away the difference, in proportioning.

I find that my Exploder with its 10 inch brakes stops about the same as my former Bronco II with its 9 inch brakes. Which isn't surprising given that they have the same front brakes.

It's amazing how many RABS RBVs have nonfunctional rear brakes. If you're having a problem, make sure your rear brakes actually work. Or they won't work after a swap, either.

 

[tanbuddy]

Is there a difference b/n the finned and non finned 10 inch brakes? I checked online b/n explorer shoes and drums, and ranger shoes and drums and the dimensions were the same. Are the fins just 4 cooling and all else equal?