Crown Vic Rear Discs

[hsr]

Anyone have a <2002 CV rotor laying around? I can't get to mine right now. I have 2003 rotor on my screen in CAD and want to compare some dimensions.

Can someone measure theirs and post:

What is the distance from the outboard wheel mounting face to the outboard pad face?

Diamater of the E brake surface.

In/out dimension of the E brake shoe surface

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[bnickel]

just as a follow up i sent Vintage Venom an email asking about their "standard" rear disc kit which has the internal drum parking brake and asked a few questions. i wanted to know if the kit still has the vented rotors and if the calipers were offset like the C-V stuff. the rotors are indeed still ventilated and the calipers are not flip flopped likie C-V stuff. so that has pretty much sealed it for me, i'll most likely be using their rear disc kit on the cougar. on the front i plan on using Degins dropped spindles and the 2 piston PBR calipers with 11" rotors. so i've pretty much got the brake system for the cougar decided for now

 

[ultrastang]

Anyone have a <2002 CV rotor laying around? I can't get to mine right now. I have 2003 rotor on my screen in CAD and want to compare some dimensions.

Can someone measure theirs and post:

What is the distance from the outboard wheel mounting face to the outboard pad face?

Diamater of the E brake surface.

In/out dimension of the E brake shoe surface

Thanks,
Jeff

I have a set of 1998 cop car C-V rear rotors. 1996-2002 uses the same rotor.

The distance from the wheel face of the rotor [the "hat"] to the outer friction surface is 1.652".

1996-2002 C-V rear rotor O.D. is 11.215" ( Nominal thickness is .550" --discard thickness is .512" [1992-1995 C-V rotor O.D. is 11.415", nominal thickness is .500"].
Height (from back side of friction surface to wheel face of rotor) on '96-'02 rotor is 2.295".

2003-present C-V rotor O.D. is 11.615". Nominal thickness is .750". --discard thickness is .709". Height is 2.290".


1998 parking brake shoes (both fore & aft) are 1-3/16" wide by 8-1/16" long.

 

[hsr]

I have a set of 1998 cop car C-V rear rotors. 1996-2002 uses the same rotor.

The distance from the wheel face of the rotor [the "hat"] to the outer friction surface is 1.652".

1996-2002 C-V rear rotor O.D. is 11.215" ( Nominal thickness is .550" --discard thickness is .512" [1992-1995 C-V rotor O.D. is 11.415", nominal thickness is .500"].
Height (from back side of friction surface to wheel face of rotor) on '96-'02 rotor is 2.295".

2003-present C-V rotor O.D. is 11.615". Nominal thickness is .750". --discard thickness is .709". Height is 2.290".


1998 parking brake shoes (both fore & aft) are 1-3/16" wide by 8-1/16" long.

Steve,

I should have clarified; I was asking for the diameter of the parking brake opening and the machined pad contact surface on the rotor itself.

Thanks for the info you did provide.

The 2003 rotor is as follows:
Distance from the wheel face of the rotor [the "hat"] to the outer friction surface is 36.5mm or 1.437".

So now we know the outboard pad face is 0.215" closer to the wheel mounting surface and that would put the inboard pad face 0.015" further outbard as well. Do you think the caliper can float that far outboard (plus the 0.100" for additional rotor thickness) to accomidate?

The ebrake opening on the 2003 rotor is 184mm diameter (or 7.244") and the shoe friction surface is 43mm (or 1.692") wide. Does that work with <2002 ebrake setup?

 

[ultrastang]

Steve,

I should have clarified; I was asking for the diameter of the parking brake opening and the machined pad contact surface on the rotor itself.

Thanks for the info you did provide.

The 2003 rotor is as follows:
Distance from the wheel face of the rotor [the "hat"] to the outer friction surface is 36.5mm or 1.437".

So now we know the outboard pad face is 0.215" closer to the wheel mounting surface and that would put the inboard pad face 0.015" further outbard as well. Do you think the caliper can float that far outboard (plus the 0.100" for additional rotor thickness) to accomidate?

The ebrake opening on the 2003 rotor is 184mm diameter (or 7.244") and the shoe friction surface is 43mm (or 1.692") wide. Does that work with <2002 ebrake setup?

Jeff,

On the '98 C-V rotor I have, the parking brake opening on the back side of the rotor is ~7-3/32" I.D.

Without having an '03-up rotor to try and place it on the earlier C-V brake assembly, it's hard to say if those dimensions will work or if it's just enough to throw everything off. I do know that the '03-up C-V brakes have several variations over the earlier setups aside from the rotor dimension differences.

The calipers of the '03-later models are a different casting from the earlier versions. Having to spread the earlier caliper's pads an additional .200" overall [.100" per side] may be pushing the gap beyond it's limits (??), but can't say for sure without actually having the thicker '03 rotor to see if it will or won't go between the pads of an earlier C-V's caliper.

Another potential problem area of putting the larger '03 rotor on the earlier C-V setup would be the ears of the anchor bracket where the caliper mounts/slides. Here again, without having the larger rotor to try and place on the older setup, I don't know if the rotor is too large to fit within the ears?

 

[Piper106]

I have a couple of dumb questions.

First, has anyone tried to put the the Crown Vic rear disc set up on a Mustang / Ranger 7.5 or 8.8 axle?? That axle has the same small 2.85" bearing but a different bolt pattern than the small pattern 8 and 9 inch axles, and the caliper brackets / backing plates would have to be redrilled.

I have a 7.5 Ranger axle in the garage that I will be putting disc brakes on and was wondering if the Crown Vic arrangement was a possible option.

Second question.
Could the Crown Vic caliper brackets / backing plates be 're-clocked' to put the calipers on both side of the car behind the axle (or in front of the axle)???

I have never had the parts in my hands, but there are drawings on the internet (gee, all the information on the internet is good, isn't it??) that make it look like the spot welds / rivets between the caliper bracket and the backing plate that carries the E brake could be cut and the parts re-oriented to make them opposite hand. The backing plate outside the E-brake area would have to be chopped to make it happen, but that area seems like just a non-structural dust shield for the rotor. Comments from those that have seen the parts????

Piper106

 

[Rusty67]

I have a couple of dumb questions.

First, has anyone tried to put the the Crown Vic rear disc set up on a Mustang / Ranger 7.5 or 8.8 axle?? That axle has the same small 2.85" bearing but a different bolt pattern than the small pattern 8 and 9 inch axles, and the caliper brackets / backing plates would have to be redrilled.

I have a 7.5 Ranger axle in the garage that I will be putting disc brakes on and was wondering if the Crown Vic arrangement was a possible option.

I think the Explorer rear disk setup would fit better, possibly without mods. The bearing size doesn't really mean anything, its more the spacing of the axles passed the flange and the size/orientation of the flange on the axle tube.

Second question.
Could the Crown Vic caliper brackets / backing plates be 're-clocked' to put the calipers on both side of the car behind the axle (or in front of the axle)???

I have never had the parts in my hands, but there are drawings on the internet (gee, all the information on the internet is good, isn't it??) that make it look like the spot welds / rivets between the caliper bracket and the backing plate that carries the E brake could be cut and the parts re-oriented to make them opposite hand. The backing plate outside the E-brake area would have to be chopped to make it happen, but that area seems like just a non-structural dust shield for the rotor. Comments from those that have seen the parts????
Piper106

Anything is possible, but that would take a lot of fab work which isn't worth the effort IMO.

 

[Piper106]

Rusty67: "I think the Explorer rear disk setup would fit better, possibly without mods. The bearing size doesn't really mean anything, its more the spacing of the axles passed the flange and the size/orientation of the flange on the axle tube."

Not that the Explorer might be an easier adaptation when all is said and done, but the Explorer disc set up has a hole in the backing plate large enough for the 'big' (3.15" diameter) bearing. The Mustang and Ranger 7.5 and 8.8 bolt pattern is so small that the attaching bolts would have nothing to attach to, since they would fall inside the Explorer center bearing hole. It would take more than just a redrill of the Explorer caliper bracket / backing plate.

Or at least that is what I think I know.

Piper106