Big bearing front spindles?

The Bearings used on the standard Pantera axles are not what you would consider small.
In fact they are the same size, (or close as damn to it) as what is fitted to many modern larger & heavier cars.
I have an 02' GM Holden Commodore Ute, (Ute version of the Australian made Pontiac GTO).
Bearings are the same size & the car is 1600kg, (3520 lb) front engine LS1 V8 & fitted with wide low profile wheels.
Over 100 thou on the clock & bearings have never even given a hint of being worn.
Its weight, front engine, low profile tyres & the fact that it gets driven hard is testament to the capability of the bearings.
We also fit the same bearings to our off-road race buggies.
Although these buggies are much lighter, the bearings are greatly stressed when you land from a jump of several feet at high speed, as well as constant pounding over rough terrain at speed.

Sure the Pantera has more wheel offset outward which causes more bearing stress than a standard front face wheel application.
But the Pantera is light, rear engine & only really sees bearing stress in hard corners & hard braking, but again, not as much as a larger heavier car.

I think as long as you use quality bearings, quality grease, well adjusted & keep an eye on adjustment I doubt you would ever have issues.

Obviously this is just my opinion.
Regards,
Tony.

The bearing size itself is not really an issue.
If you compare the front hubs on the Pantera to the 65-69 Mustangs you will find that they interchange.
The od of the front hubs on the Mustangs was chaged during the 69 model production to use a larger inside diameter bearing to increase the strength to handle the change over to 60 series wide oval tires.
This was also a God send for racers since the weak link of the front suspension was the hubs.
Wilkinson is listing only the GT5 as a replacement part.
I suppose that I will need to call him to see if it uses the same bearings since no one here seems to know.
It isn't only the size of the hub shaft on the Pantera, but the size of the bolts that hold it all together is on the wimpy side by comparison to the Mustangs.
In looking at all of this comparison, if the size of the tires, the width of the wheel, and size of the brakes is increased and put into heavy service like racing or even open track, I have my doubts that there won't be some kind of an issue there.
Granted there is a difference in the front/rear weight loading of the suspension between the two cars but it is best to be safe here rather then dead with track personnel picking you up with a vacuum cleaner and broom and shovel?
The front hub of the Pantera seems to have only one choice that I see, so there may not be another way to go but I'm just looking for information on this.'
There doesn't seem to be alot of that available?
Thanks.

Does anyone have any documented incidents of any Pantera spindle failures over the last 40 years?

I've never heard of one.

quote:

Originally posted by 1973 Pantera:
Does anyone have any documented incidents of any Pantera spindle failures over the last 40 years?

I've never heard of one.

Hum? Why would you?

The answer from Wilkinson is that there is only one front spindle, so that ends it. No other choices.

I was just curious if anyone had ever personally had or heard of a failure of a Pantera spindle.

BTW, the Ferrari 308/328 and Porsche 911, 930, and 944 use the same front bearings as the Pantera (TIMKIN: LM67048 inner, LM11949 outer).

I had a spindle failure on a 1969 Mercury Cougar. Thankfully it happened as I was just backing out of a parking space. It sheared right in half. If it would of happened just a minute later I would have been zooming down the interstate at 70+!!

quote:

Originally posted by 1973 Pantera:
I was just curious if anyone had ever personally had or heard of a failure of a Pantera spindle.

BTW, the Ferrari 308/328 and Porsche 911, 930, and 944 use the same front bearings as the Pantera (TIMKIN: LM67048 inner, LM11949 outer).

I had a spindle failure on a 1969 Mercury Cougar. Thankfully it happened as I was just backing out of a parking space. It sheared right in half. If it would of happened just a minute later I would have been zooming down the interstate at 70+!!

It isn't common on a street car, but who knows for sure? Certainly Detomaso or Ford never felt there was a need to upgrade it like the Mustang.

The od of the thick part of the spindle on the Pantera is 32mm. Exactly the same as the 65 through 69 Mustangs. In '70 ford increased the OD to 35mm.

When you put them side to side, it is like night and day.

Interestingly enough the OD of the bearings was kept the same so the likely answer was the spindle was too thin.

The weight distribution is the oposite in the Mustang vs. Pantera. 40/60 and 60/40.

I suspect you would have to speak to a serious Pantera racer for the answer on this but apparently the Pantera factory race cars use the same spindle.

While I had everything apart I thought I would see if I could increase my knowledge here.

I find the Pantera unusual also in the size of the brakes. The front rotors are 10.5" od just like the Mustangs. The Mustang vented rotor fits right on the Pantera hub. You do need to mess with the wheel studs though.

If you wanted to mess with the wheel studs you could swap a Mustang front hub right onto the Pantera.

The odd thing about the brakes on the Pantera is that the rear discs are 11" in the back but have a little pad. So what's with that? The small pad cancels out the bigger rotor? Very strange if you ask me.

My notes show the stock front rotor is 11.125 diameter and the stock rear is 11.75.

We offer an upgrade for the rear brakes alone to balance out the braking performance once the proportioning valve is removed from the front brake circuit.

quote:

Originally posted by Z06 Pantera:
My notes show the stock front rotor is 11.125 diameter and the stock rear is 11.75.

We offer an upgrade for the rear brakes alone to balance out the braking performance once the proportioning valve is removed from the front brake circuit.

I have mine apart right now. The front is exactly the same od as the Mustang rotor. 11.3".

The rear is 11.5"+/- od.

They are the original rotors with 30,000 miles on them.

I also have mine apart. The front measures just under 11.125 and the rear measures just over 11.625. So know the question is why are yours smaller than mine???

Beats the Hell out of me. Now I feel so inadequate. I hate being too small? Maybe I have a defective tape measure? YIKES!

quote:

Beats the Hell out of me. Now I feel so inadequate. I hate being too small? Maybe I have a defective tape measure? YIKES!

I also feel that the standard rear brakes on the Pantera are inadequate.
They would be just fine for a front engine car.
But a mid mount layout like the Pantera transfers less weight to the front during heavy braking.
So you can fit larger rear brakes to the Pantera & get the car to pull up quicker.
This is because the Pantera sits flatter during heavy braking.
I think the first thing to do is throw the original Pantera brake proportioning valves in the bin.
They are designed to control hydraulic brake pressure front to rear & hydraulic pressure between the two front wheels.
The Front one restricts total brake force just from being there; you may loose something like 10% of total brake force through this valve.

I upgraded my rear brakes to 12” vented Wilwood rotors with 4 piston Wilwood calipers.
Made custom caliper mounts to adapt the calipers to the original uprights.
Then fitted a Wilwood master cylinder with a bigger 1 1/8” bore to gain more volume to supply those larger rear calipers.
Because of the larger master cylinder the pedal will be harder, so I fitted a dual diaphragm 8” brake booster to give more vacuum advantage.
Then fitted an adjustable lever type Tilton proportioning valve in the rear brake line.
All brake hoses are 1/8” stainless braided.
During testing I would do emergency stops from around 80 kph, (50 mph).
The rears were locking first, so I dialed out the rears one click at a time on the proportioning valve until I just had the front brakes locking before the rears.
Brakes are much better with the limitation being the capability of the 15” tyres.

Regards,
Tony.

OK. I'm back after getting reassurance that I'm not too small after all. Cost me a few bucks and she probably would have told me anything I wanted to hear anyway since I was paying?

I went and bought a real tape measure and it isn't missing any digits.

My front Pantera rotor measures 11.060" od. The 68 Mustang according to Centric is 11.29" od.

The rear Pantera needs to be taken apart and is difficult to get without brake calipers. Seems to have a 5-5/8" radius, until it comes apart to verify.

What started all of this is that I just finished a project on my 68 Shelby GT350 on which I installed the front brake system that was used on the 68 Shelby Trans-Am Mustang race cars (with 15" rims) and the 69 Boss 302 Trans-Am cars.

That system used what the racers refer to as the "big Lincoln" brakes. For 15" wheels, many Ford racers consider it to be the ultimate.

They originally used the Lincoln/T-bird front rotors and 4 piston brake calipers.

The rotor over the years has gone from 12"od to the now standardized (because it fits all of the big Ford cars from 65-69) 11.73" od rotor. It is 1.24" thick and vented.

Because it is out of the "Ford family" it fits the 65-73 Mustang hubs which are also used on the big Fords. The Pantera has a Ford family front hub, and it fits it also.

The 70 Mustang got an increase in the size of the spindle od on both the small and large bearings. The large bearing went from 32mm id on the 65-69 cars to 35mm on the 70 and up. As such it is a cheap insurance for a race car to switch the spindles over to the large race spindles.

Since when you look at the engineering cross overs here, I was investigating if the Pantera front spindles followed suit with the Mustangs.

What I was investigating was how simple or complicated the adapter would need to be to swap this "trans-am" braking system over to the Pantera.

Enough explanation?

Now for those of you that will immediately jump up and yell "Heretic", I say "bless you my son".

The Wilewood rotor with aluminum hat that would be the substitute for the Tbird rotor, is virtually the same weight. Most of the weight is caused by the thickness of the rotor which is the same. So don't go screaming about the weight differences, because there is virtually no difference, or not enough to argue over? Certainly if you compare the price differences between these two set ups, the "Big Lincoln", becomes very attractive and many would be willing to overlook the fact that the new aftermarket would be closer to the ultimate?

The Lincoln caliper true is iron and not as fancy as the aluminum aftermarket. It is four piston and the pads are nice and large. Porterfield R4S pads are stocked because of the commonality with the set up.

But in all honesty, wearing all that anodized aluminum like "BREMBO!", with IT'S SEEMIMNGLY neon light logo names on them make me feel like a Tiajuana pimp.

Anyway, what came out of this is that the 68 Mustang front rotor (without the cast in hub) is really a good substitute for the stock front Pantera rotor. Transfer right over to the P front hub.

Lots, lots cheaper then the P car piece from Wilkinson too.

Now the rear is another story. Still just looking at that one.

It does look like the Tbird rotor fits for od and hub alignment but the thickness doesn't look like it will work with the stock rear P car calipers?

I've come to the conclusion that the tiny stock rear P pad was used on that big rear rotor to eliminate necessity for a proportioning valve, front/back, by Detomaso.

Now, so far I would say that the T-bird vented rotor od will transfer over to the hub assembly in the rear, but the entire P rear caliper causes all sorts of substitution limitations?

What is the point of putting the rotor in, except for a cheap substitution to the stock rotor, if the stock P rear pads are so small?

Irregardless, I think that an inline proportioning valve is going to be required if the rear is played with at all.

Considering how hard you will need to test the car to adjust it to, you literally will need a race track all to yourself to work on that adjustment, so for me, on all of this, the jury is still out.

I am looking at the Volvo S60 R calipers as an alternative in both locations too. I suspect though that they would be a better swap on a larger rotor because of the stock size of the Volvo rotors at 15.9" od, and the probable interference with the pads on a smaller rotor?

They might be a really good swap over on a big wheel Pantera though?

At this point I really am wondering what the factory race cars did for brakes back when... You can't convince me that they ran the stock production set up?

OK. Happy bickering now gentlemen. I really know how to stir it up, huh?

I agree with Tony- the rear brakes are marginal. The front calipers are excellent and front rotors are easily upgraded in a variety of ways. The overall thickness you need depends entirely on whether you track-race the car and how hard. BTW, vented rotors stabilize temperatures 100 or so degrees F lower than solid rotors but this only happens after many repeated hard stops. A 0.81"-wide vented rotor will also overheat if pushed too hard. This doesn't happen on the street, by the way- which is why many street conversions from vendors use same-thickness vented rotors as stock: 0.81". They also allow one to use stock calipers. A 1.25" thick rotor (same as was used in the LeMans racers in '72) is pro-track-sized and won't overheat unless you really beat on your car, but are quite a bit heavier and need wider, heavier calipers to fit them. All this extra mass also really needs heavier springs and better shocks to control the extra weight. Your call as to how bad you need 'big brakes'.

Rear rotor swaps are a problem; first because you must remove and completely tear down the rear uprights before trying to fit things up. This stops many owners right there. Next, you find that the 'hat' section inset for the rear must be machined to clear the outboard protruding section of the rear upright- which takes a much larger open space inside the 'hat' than at the front. So the 'same' rotors won't work on both ends unaltered. The 3rd little difficulty is clearance between the rotor 'hat' and the wheel stud-heads. This can also change a little in either direction once everything is torqued down and hot. I've seen vented-disc conversions that hit the stud-heads hard enough to leave grooves; not a good idea in a part holding your wheel on!

Not racing our Pantera for money, I converted to early Porsche 911 0.81" thick vented discs (virtually identical in thickness & OD to stock Pantera except for the hat adapter needed). This was nearly 20 years ago. I ran the Porsche discs for several years using Pantera calipers, then upgraded the rear calipers to early Porsche 911S aluminum front 2-piston calipers with a simple strap adapter. These nice calipers have a little over twice the pad surface area of stock Pantera rear caliper pads. They are easily balanced to either the stock 4-piston Pantera caliper or Wilwood Superlite 2's, using a manual adjustable proportioning valve. With this final combo plus the stock non-adjustable proprtioning valve AND the problematic brake warning light/shuttle valve gone, I'm able to lock up 245-50 fronts OR 295-50 rears in a full panic stop. The thing truely has super-brakes.

Jack's Rules of Thumb on Brakes:
1)- If in a full-panic stop on clean dry pavement, you CANNOT lock up any wheel, you need bigger or improved brakes.
2)- If you CAN lock up a wheel, you need more tire to fully use the brakes you already have.
3)- Once #2 is achieved, you then continue increasing the tire patch size and the brake performance, correctly balancing each incremental change with a manual proportioning valve, until either you run out of money or need tires too wide to fit under the fenders.

A final warning: fooling around with brakes on a street car is serious business, more so than for racing. Some enthusiasts who exceeded their skill-level with brake swaps have wound up under a semi-trailer. If you have ANY doubts as to what to do here or how to do it, the vendors all have fully-sorted brake upgrade kits, with copious instructions. They are not that expensive, either. I recommend them compared to some of the scary home-grown conversions I've seen.

First, I thank EVERYONE for their input. It is much appreciated.
As far as "big brakes" goes, cautions understood. I would also add that the big rotors need to be indexed, and a micro cut put on the rotors on the car to minimize vibration, because of the mass of the rotor.
The 1.25" thick rotor was used, yes, as far as I know for the heat build up reduction.
Do I need 500hp, big brakes, a Penthouse Pet of the Year? Good question. "We" all create our own problems, don't "we".

This year at Virginia International Raceway at the SAAC Convention #36, I saw the Trans-Am Mustangs go through four sets of pads and rotors in "Practice" before the race. That says a lot. Mostly, I'm glad it wasn't me?

The front caliper weights, although part of the total equation, seem to be the minor part. The major one is, what to do with the rotor?

Looking at the rear, the first thing noticed was the lack of clearence to the upright. Noted BossWrench...I see it.

It may be the Wilewood calipers are the best rear solution. Let me just say that I don't like the overall sizing of the fasteners and am concerned that the "adapters" for the calipers are going to be the weak link, or more concerning, the "fuse able link". Especially with the additional torsional stresses applied to them with this level of braking. Particularly in the front.

No question on a proportioning valve. Absolutely necessary.

Bosswrech. Do you know what calipers were used with the 1.25 front rotors at LeMans?
Looking at the front setup (and having the parts here), it does look like the Trans-Am Mustang caliper adapter will work on the front of the P car if the existing caliper mounts on the bolt on rack adapter is machined off.

In 1972 if I was involved with any of the Ford teams and was sent over to Detomaso, that is the way I would go, i.e., and use the Lincoln calipers, which were already extensively race proven, plentiful, and relatively cheap.

The rear? Well that's another story as we already know but that same Tbird rotor does fit up back there. The question would be what calipers to use.

You could go with something like the Boss 302 stage III set up with front calipers mounted to an adapter with no parking brakes? But I think I am guessing here.

Holman-Moody was involved in Pantera racing back then in Europe at Fords request...or maybe that was at their insistence?

There is definitely an American influence or involvement in finding race solutions out of the existing Ford inventory of production parts.

quote:

It may be the Wilewood calipers are the best rear solution. Let me just say that I don't like the overall sizing of the fasteners and am concerned that the "adapters" for the calipers are going to be the weak link, or more concerning, the "fuse able link". Especially with the additional torsional stresses applied to them with this level of braking. Particularly in the front.

If you are interested in doing Wilwood calipers on a stock rotor, we can supply you with 2 Wilwood 4 Piston Calipers, 4 Grade 12.9 steel Bolts for mounting the bracket, and 4 Grade 8 steel bolts for mounting the caliper.

You don't have to worry about the bracket being the weakest link. It is made out of 1/2 Steel and the stresses are not perpendicular to the bracket. The stresses are in the same direction as the rotor. I agree, the weakest point would be the smaller mounting bolts that the Pantera has on a stock upright. That's why we upgraded to the 12.9 strength bolt.

Here's a link to some info on our Rear Brake Upgrade kit.
http://blog.saccrestorations.n...r-brake-upgrade-kit/

I doubt that I am staying with the stock rotors. For the intended use of this car I can live with the 1.25 rotors. If they are to big of a PITA I can always go back to stock.

The difference to me of 1.1" or 1.24" is insignificant at this point. I weighed both rotors and for some reason the 1.1" thick is 2 pounds heavier then the 1.24"

What does your rear kit do for a parking brake? I see no mention of it.

quote:

What does your rear kit do for a parking brake? I see no mention of it.

1.25 is way overkill for a street car that will see occasional track use. The kit Chris mentioned to you was for using a stock rotor.

We also have a 6 piston setup that uses 1.1 thick rotors. We use the stock Caliper for the parking brake to save on cost.

Parking brakes are a problem, as there is not much available.
I fitted Wilwood parking brake calipers & I have to say they are SHIT.
Absolutly useless, even when tripling the leverage applied to them.
Brake pad area is no larger than a kids go kart caliper.
And that is where the problem is with the small number of aftermarket parking brake calipers available.
They all have tiny brake pads.

So my hand brake is around 30% effective at best.
I have a pair of late model Mini, (BMW) parking brake calipers that I will install sometime in the future to solve the problem.

regards,
Tony.

wilwood parking brake calipers ARE go kart calipers.

If the stock existing rear calipers are kept for the parking brakes only, isn't the thickness of the rear rotor limited?

Frankly, my stock parking brake sucks too and I'd like to get something better.

The stock Caliper works fine for a parking brake. The bracket needs a small modification if using it on a thicker rotor. I am running the stock Caliper on at 13 x 1.1 inch rotor. Works great! With it adjusted properly it works very well for a parking brake!

I'm not running the stock caliper as a parking brake as its way too heavy, (and ugly & crude).
The Mini, (BMW) ones will do the trick as they are Aluminium, lightweight & far better looking.

quote:

Originally posted by Z06 Pantera:
The stock Caliper works fine for a parking brake.

That's an opinion I do not share. Under the best of conditions it is merely marginal...in my opinion.

quote:

and ugly & crude

Thank you. The whole point was for an inexpensive option.

You can also use the stock rear caliper as a parking brake with wider than stock rotors. In fact, Wilkinson uses stock rear calipers with 1.25" wide rotors. He splits the caliper mounting bracket and welds it back together with two pieces of stock, of the appropriate thickness, added between the two halves. He also makes longer pad retaining pins. The only knock against using the stock rear caliper as a parking brake is it's a bit heavy for the application. I've seen guys drill a bunch of lightening holes in the bracket and machine the hydraulic portion off of the caliper, in an effort to lighten the assembly.

I used a parking brake caliper made by Stop Tech. It's called the ST-10 (http://www.stoptech.com/Products/BBK/caliper_descriptions.shtml) and it works brilliantly. It's compact and holds the car on a very steep grade without any problem. It could also be lighter but it's still the best parking brake solution I've come across.

The problem is, it's not an inexpensive way to go. If I were doing it all over, I'd use the stock rear calipers as a parking brake.

quote:

That's an opinion I do not share. Under the best of conditions it is merely marginal...in my opinion.

As a PARKING BRAKE it works fine. I can stall my engine with the parking brake. The car will not roll. Isn't that the point?

15 years ago, I mounted up a pair of Wilwood Go-Kart cable brake calipers to our L model's stock rear rotors, since I'd already changed the rear brake calipers to a more reasonable size (that could actually stop the car...). The Wilwood calipers were less than $100 a pair and the custom mounting bracket was not too difficult to fabricate. I've since made another pair of mounts for a friend who had trouble duplicating my setup. The stock Pantera brake cable adapted onto the little calipers easily. The loose pucks do rattle a bit, though. This is the same rig that Pantera East sells for both Panteras and Vipers although his bracket is different and the calipers are engraved 'Pantera'. I do not patent my adaptions; free for all....

When I look at the size of the pads for the aftermarket" parking brakes, they are very similar to the Panteras stock rear pads to me.

The idea of using the stock Pantera caliper, modified to the thicker rotor actually isn't a bad idea. Clever actually.

I actually have an 11.75"od x 1.1" vented rotor here from my 07 Fusion. It actually weighs a little more then 2 pounds more then the 11.73"od x 1.24"thick Tbird rotors. So, sofar, I see little disadvantage to running that Tbird front rotor.

I've gotta say that at this point I think the best rear rotor to run on the Pantera is the Mustang front 11.3" x .81" vented rotor. The offset is exact and the difference in od is nominal.

Now calipers. The Wilwoods are really nice. The six piston Superlite for the front is probably my choice. It is kind of pricey though. Can't argue that it is half the weight of the big Lincoln 4 piston calipers. Those have 4 1.65" pistons and are very easy to adapt to the front Pantera hubs. So will the Wilwoods. 4 piston Wilwoods are cheaper by quite a bit. No decision made here yet but I have my Wish List.

The rears will work nicely with the four piston Wilwood Superlite calipers I think. Again, pretty simple to adapt.

I have to pull off my master cylinder to measure the bore. I have Halls polished unit on there and never thought of measuring the cylinder bore before I installed it.

I have as it turns out, the original master cylinder from the Boss"Trans-Am" kit on my Shelby. Interesting because the number stamped into the side, the suffix, can't be found in cross reference anywhere. It measures about 1-5/16" bore.

It is thought that it was sourced from an F series truck of the era. It has a much larger reservoir then the stock Mustang but bolts right up to the stock mounts, and is rebuild-able. Interesting.

Yes the pedal is hard but it requires so little travel to move the brakes I find it very easy to use. You don't have to stand on it at all to get braking. Just touch it.

I'm not sure the Pantera needs anywhere near that kind of pressure. 1-1/8" bore is most likely more then adequate for the most severe conditions.

One of the brake vendors, who shall remain nameless, told me (confided?) that the reason he recommends a 1-1/8" bore is because he got to many complaints about the pedal hardness on anything larger. Not the pedal effort mind you...the hardness. Ironic. To me that's what I like about the big bore?

Firmness in a car offers me comfort. Softness...is discomforting. Personal preferences I suppose?

quote:

Originally posted by Bosswrench: .....The loose pucks do rattle a bit, though. This is the same rig that Pantera East sells for both Panteras and Vipers although his bracket is different and the calipers are engraved 'Pantera'.

Last I knew Marino and all other Vendors were sourcing those calipers from IPSCO and those are not Wilwood mechanicals.

Best,
K

This started as a spindle discussion and seemed to branch into a brake discussion. Has anyone used or seen this setup from Wilwood...it's a full kit for a 65-69 Mustang brake upgrade using the V8 front spindles which is what I've gathered from this thread is what the Pantera has???

http://www.wilwood.com/BrakeKi...spx?itemno=140-11072

For $825 you get everything you need: rotors, hats, forged hubs, calipers, bracket to mount the calipers, bearings, everything. It comes with 4 piston forged Dynalite calipers with a 12.19 diameter rotor. So if this fits, its a great way to upgrade the front brakes.

If that isn't good enough, for $1091 you can get the same kit with the Wilwood 6 piston Dynapro Calipers.

http://www.wilwood.com/BrakeKi...ake+V-8+Spindle+Only.

There are a bunch of variations on these kits with drilled and slotted rotors.

This would work great with the Sacc Restorations Rear Caliper kit for $499.

Has anyone tried one of these?

You're got to check for clearance with 15" wheels with this kit. It really isn't set up for them.

If you're asking if they will fit the Pantera hub, the answer should be no. The Pantera uses the same wheel bearings as the Mustang up to 1970. The od is the same but the id is smaller to fit onto the smaller sized spindle.

At that point the size of the spindle on the Mustang was enlarged. It uses the same od diameter bearings but larger id bearings at that point to fit onto the larger Mustang hub.

The spindle that you want to find for the Mustang to race it would be the '70+ or '70-1/2 and up DRUM BRAKE spindle. That is ONLY because the adapter for the big Lincoln brake calipers is made for that hub since the cast in bolt flange is heftier then the disc brake spindle.

Interesting though that Wilwood references that spindle in the specs?

According to the Wilwood site these kits are for 15" wheels....I have 17's in front 18's in the rear, so I have no clearance issues, in fact they have larger kits available for wheels with my sizing.

Do a vehicle search on the Wilwood site for their big brake kits...put in the 66 mustang V8 and it comes up with these kits. Doug, one of your previous posts was that the spindles were smaller until 69 or 70 when they were enlarged, but that the 66 matched the Pantera. That would also make sense if a 66 mustang one piece rotor/hub will fit our Pantera spindles. NO?

My other question was if the caliper mount bracket that comes with the kit is a direct bolt up to the Pantera spindle. If this fits a 66 mustang spindle (which is the same as the Pantera???) and the kit comes with a forged hub that is matched to the hat/rotor and all this is engineered by Wilwood together, this is an awesome kit.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom@Seal Beach:
According to the Wilwood site these kits are for 15" wheels....I have 17's in front 18's in the rear, so I have no clearance issues, in fact they have larger kits available for wheels with my sizing.

>I just read it and it says it will fit SOME 15" wheels, and to check for clearance to be sure by checking the distance from the center line of the hub.
[/QUOTE]
Do a vehicle search on the Wilwood site for their big brake kits...put in the 66 mustang V8 and it comes up with these kits. Doug, one of your previous posts was that the spindles were smaller until 69 or 70 when they were enlarged, but that the 66 matched the Pantera. That would also make sense if a 66 mustang one piece rotor/hub will fit our Pantera spindles. NO?
[/QUOTE]

>I would think the hub will fit the Pantera spindle,yes, but cavete emptor.

[/QUOTE]
My other question was if the caliper mount bracket that comes with the kit is a direct bolt up to the Pantera spindle. If this fits a 66 mustang spindle (which is the same as the Pantera???) and the kit comes with a forged hub that is matched to the hat/rotor and all this is engineered by Wilwood together, this is an awesome kit.[/QUOTE]

>It depends on two things whether it needs an adapter or not. Well actually three
1) Girling brakes are built on roughly a 3" bolt mounting spacing
2) US are something like 5" spacing
3)The hats are made is standardized depths. Many times you will need to shim the caliper to center it onto the rotor. You can make a spacer to eliminate that if you want to mill one half of it down to adjust for that.

You can buy a Wilwood caliper with either bolt spacing. If this kit is intended for a US car with a US spindle, then the caliper mounting bolt spacing is 5". The Pantera spacing will be 3". It will need a spacer for that alone.

2)Wilwoods are "generic" calipers and can fit various size od rotors. In order for the caliper to sit on the rotor with maximum pad fitment to the rotor (sitting on the outside edge of the rotor) it probably would need a spacer for that.

Now if you have the time, and skill, you could hack a spacer out of 3/8" or 1/2" thick steel plate. You could use a hard grade of aluminum plate too but don't tell anyone.

People that are selling premade kits usually have a Cad 2007 or better program that they detail the adapter plate on and then cut it on a plasma cutter. That makes making the adapters no sweat once you have the detail of them correct. Then they send it out for powder coating.

If you want to do it by hand figure a few days for that and then a couple of weeks for your hands and fingers to heal up from the nicks and scratches. Ooye!

Most of the time you are paying the dealer for his knowledge on putting the kit together for you and for the adapter plates. Guaranty few will sell you just the adapter. Even if they did, it isn't going to be cheap.

Cool....I think I'll order the 6 piston caliper kit.

Doug do you know if the bolt pattern for the 4 bolts at the spindle base matches that of the mustang? If it does then item #1 (in the Parts blow up of kit, see link below)shows a very nice caliper mounting bracket that would match the 6 piston caliper. If it doesn't I have a client that did machine work for a nascar team that can make a really nice bracket.

parts diagram
http://www.wilwood.com/BrakeKi...ake+V-8+Spindle+Only.

The Dynapro 6 Big Brake Front Brake Kit, says that it is for the 70 Mustang drum brake spindle.

I did some mocking up with a Kelsey Hayes brake caliper, which has the 5 inch bolt spacing, and the Pantera front spindle.

I decided that it is a bad match. There is insufficient room to make an adapter.

What that means is if you are buying that kit from Wilwood for your Pantera, you're going to have problem making an adapter for it. There isn't enough room for the adapter.

In other words a Mustang kit will not work on the Pantera.

You need to get a Wilwood caliper with a 3" bolt spacing, which this kit doesn't have.

Here's the vehicles directly from the Wilwood fitment guide for the Dynapro...I searched by vehichle 1966 Ford Mustang V8 Disc Brakes.Leads me to believe the same spindles were used in many different vehicles. Is says it fits Mustangs from 65-70, it also covers 70 GT 350's & 500's.


WILWOOD FRONT BRAKE KIT - VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY LISTING
Kit Type 1: BRAKE KIT: Dynapro 6 Big Brake Front Brake Kit (Hub)
Spindle Type:
Factory Drum Spindle ; Factory Disc Spindle;
VEHICLE MAKE: VEHICLE MODELS:

Ford Ford Fairlane 1966-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Fairlane 1966-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1970 All Drum Brake Front thru 8/24/69
Ford Ford Falcon 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Falcon 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Maverick 1970 All Drum Brake Front thru 8/24/69
Ford Ford Mustang 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Mustang 1970 Disc Brake GT350 & 500 only.
Ford Ford Mustang 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Mustang 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Mustang 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1966-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1965 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1966-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1965 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Torino 1968-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Torino 1968-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Mercury Mercury Cougar 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cougar 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cyclone 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cyclone 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Montego 1968-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Montego 1968-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom@Seal Beach:
Here's the vehicles directly from the Wilwood fitment guide for the Dynapro...I searched by vehichle 1966 Ford Mustang V8 Disc Brakes.Leads me to believe the same spindles were used in many different vehicles. Is says it fits Mustangs from 65-70, it also covers 70 GT 350's & 500's.


WILWOOD FRONT BRAKE KIT - VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY LISTING
Kit Type 1: BRAKE KIT: Dynapro 6 Big Brake Front Brake Kit (Hub)
Spindle Type:
Factory Drum Spindle ; Factory Disc Spindle;
VEHICLE MAKE: VEHICLE MODELS:

Ford Ford Fairlane 1966-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Fairlane 1966-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1970 All Drum Brake Front thru 8/24/69
Ford Ford Falcon 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Falcon 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Falcon 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Maverick 1970 All Drum Brake Front thru 8/24/69
Ford Ford Mustang 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Mustang 1970 Disc Brake GT350 & 500 only.
Ford Ford Mustang 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Mustang 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Mustang 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1966-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1965 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1966-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Ranchero 1965 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Ford Ford Torino 1968-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Ford Ford Torino 1968-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1965-1966 Disc Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Comet 1965-1966 Drum Brake V-8 Spindle Only.
Mercury Mercury Cougar 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cougar 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cyclone 1967-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Cyclone 1967-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Montego 1968-1969 Disc Brake Front Spindle.
Mercury Mercury Montego 1968-1969 Drum Brake Front Spindle.

Yes...it will fit your Mustang well.

Just a comment about front brake performance. I have the Byers, Willwood 4 piston calipers and hats all around, and the larger rotors up front. Had to add a proportioner (pressure reducer) on the front circuit because the front brakes were too powerful. Locked up easily.

The car stops like a mad dog now, but know that if you improve the brakes with modern components, the fronts will need to be dialed back.

quote:

Originally posted by ZR1 Pantera:
I also have mine apart. The front measures just under 11.125 and the rear measures just over 11.625. So know the question is why are yours smaller than mine???

It's a very good idea to install an adjustable front/rear proportioning valve.

You are going to have to readjust the ratio.

Stock the brakes do not lock up and the rear will not come around.

Give the rears more brakes and for sure the cars rear will lock up and that means the rear will swing out on you. Maybe even in just 30 mph traffic.

Dave what size tire do you run? I'm running 245-40x17 front....maybe I should go for a little less powerful caliper than a 6 piston.

I definitely planned on putting an adjustable proportioning valve in. Ideally I'd like to see if we southern cal guys would want to rent a skid pad someday to test swaybars and brake bias adjustments.

quote:

Dave what size tire do you run? I'm running 245-40x17 front....maybe I should go for a little less powerful caliper than a 6 piston.

I definitely planned on putting an adjustable proportioning valve in. Ideally I'd like to see if we southern cal guys would want to rent a skid pad someday to test swaybars and brake bias adjustments.

Tom,

I have 14inch 6 piston front rotors/Calipers and 13 inch 6 piston rears.

Increasing brake performance doesn't do a bit of good if you can't put the extra performance to the ground. It makes no sense to de-tune the front brakes because they lockup to easy. It makes better sense to get stickier tires OR remove the booster if the brakes are that good.

You can't go wrong with the 6 piston setup. Just make sure your tires are adequate.

Scott

I am a believer that the reason the brakes exist as offered was to make the car as foolproof to drive on the street as possible.

Ford had plenty of input into the Pantera and the edict from them was that there could be no way that they would finance Detomaso and sell the Pantera under the Ford logo if the car was going to understeer like the Mangusta did.

Putting the small brakes on the rear was part of the safety net built into the car.

Understeer was also.

The last thing Ford needed was a travasty similar to what happened with the new Ford GTs.

The current Ford GT Registry is indicating that as much as 40% of these cars were wrecked with under 500 miles on them.

Most of those were one car wrecks with people running into trees and poles thinking just because they could buy the car that made them AJ Foyt.

I think Ford did the right thing initially with the Pantera.

Putting more brakes on this car now isn't that simple. The panic handling of the car as far as going straight in braking will be effected.

Putting more brakes in the rear without balancing that to the front probably will be lethal.

Not everyone is going to have track time available to them to dial in a brake proportioning valve to balance.

Also you don't want to be able to lock up the front brakes in panic stopping.

The key as proven with anti-lock brakes is to keep the car straight even at the cost of longer stopping distances.

Just my opinion of this subject.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom@Seal Beach:
Dave what size tire do you run? I'm running 245-40x17 front....maybe I should go for a little less powerful caliper than a 6 piston.

I definitely planned on putting an adjustable proportioning valve in. Ideally I'd like to see if we southern cal guys would want to rent a skid pad someday to test swaybars and brake bias adjustments.

I have 225/45-17 Michelins. Any system you devise must be adjustable in some way.

It makes no sense to just chuck perfectly good tires in the effort to tune the braking performance. Put in a $40 valve and twist a knob. Easy!

De-tuning the brakes because they lockup, is like removing power from the engine because the tires break loose under acceleration.

Yes, an adjustable proportion valve is a good idea to adjust brake balance. Once the brake system is balanced, locking up the tires is either poor driving skills or poor tires IMO...

No offense intended (I mean this sincerely...)

quote:

Originally posted by ZR1 Pantera:
De-tuning the brakes because they lockup, is like removing power from the engine because the tires break loose under acceleration.

Yes, an adjustable proportion valve is a good idea to adjust brake balance. Once the brake system is balanced, locking up the tires is either poor driving skills or poor tires IMO...

No offense intended (I mean this sincerely...)

I don't know that I am disagreeing with you as much as I am debating this with myself.

If you have ever driven a 65 or 66 Shelby GT350, you would discover that it is absolutely impossible to lock up the brakes.

If you look at the brake rules discription for the 68 and later (into the '70s) rules for the GT cars like the Gulf (John Wyer era GT40), Lola T70, Porsche 930, the size of the brakes are limited.

You can play with rules like this as a ruling body to make cars more competitive. If you look at those cars and compare them to the Can-Am cars, there really isn't a tremendous difference.

There is a difference in safety factors though. The Can-Am cars are just plain lethal, as proven in their mortality rates, and the GT's have a better record as far as less people killed.

Now, they didn't restrict the size of the brakes to get less stopping, they did it to make the drivers less daring and drive within the car, and not outside of it's limitations.

The Can-Am cars had huge brakes, reduced weight, and huge horsepower engines, for their era. 600hp then was not obtainable by everyone. Now more than that is in street cars.

The formula didn't work. They ran off the tracks in the corners and into any obstruction they could find.

Granted these were crude days of air effect wings. They were there but compared to the computer controlled wings that change as the g loads and speeds did, like in Formula 1 now, they were pre-school, pre-science projects.

What I am saying here, is that there is a real issue with inability to put enough tire on the car, a real ability to put a lot of power into the car.

I'm not sure that I am capable of balancing the mechanical sciences here.

In retrospect, looking at how these limitations were built int the original car, I have to seriously consider the solution.

Fact is with a box stock Pantera, virtually ANYONE who can drive a stick, specialized in the Pantera's case as it is, can get into the car and drive it really fast, over 125 mph the first time, like it is nothing, like it is doing 55 mph.

Just like there is a practical horsepower limit to these cars, in that over a certain number the car just won't go any faster, there is a practical limit to tires, and BRAKES.

This is my thought on the entire subject, other to say that I'd have to reserve judgement on driveing a Pantera, really hard, that had these upgrades to make a rational decision on where to go with the solution.

I like the idea of the 6 piston Wilwood caliper in the front. I agree that 1.25" thick rotors are there for race durability reasons and are no where needed even marginally on the street or even tracked street cars, but where to go on the rears is another unknown all together.

Now if I could just find a factory Gp4 car owner that would let me take a few laps just to see if I liked the entire package concept of it...

BUT these are the issues that keep me busy and rarely bored.

Doug,

What is happening here? I am in complete agreement with you AGAIN!

I think part of the problem with safety is anyone can get a car like ours, put a huge high horsepower motor in it, with huge brakes, and then their testosterone kicks in. They think they are invincible. They stop thinking and believe the car can do anything. Until they wrap it around a pole.

I use to have a hi horsepower off-road car. Over the years, everybody and there mother's were getting these cars. Guys were taking 2nd's on their houses to buy a 50-80K off-road car. FOR THEIR FIRST CAR. What do you think happened to a lot of these guys. Yes, they crashed their cars. Some rolled and some people were killed. They get in a high dollar car and feel invincible.

I believe with a high horse power car and a car with race worthy brakes, you need the appropriate tires to get the power and brake performance to the ground and the driver skill to maintain control. And I agree that there are limits to both usable horsepower and usable brake performance on the street.

quote:

Originally posted by ZR1 Pantera:
Doug,

What is happening here? I am in complete agreement with you AGAIN!

I think part of the problem with safety is anyone can get a car like ours, put a huge high horsepower motor in it, with huge brakes, and then their testosterone kicks in. They think they are invincible. They stop thinking and believe the car can do anything. Until they wrap it around a pole.

I use to have a hi horsepower off-road car. Over the years, everybody and there mother's were getting these cars. Guys were taking 2nd's on their houses to buy a 50-80K off-road car. FOR THEIR FIRST CAR. What do you think happened to a lot of these guys. Yes, they crashed their cars. Some rolled and some people were killed. They get in a high dollar car and feel invincible.

I believe with a high horse power car and a car with race worthy brakes, you need the appropriate tires to get the power and brake performance to the ground and the driver skill to maintain control. And I agree that there are limits to both usable horsepower and usable brake performance on the street.

OMG! What's going on here?

The fuesable link here is the tires.

It is possible to create and put on the street a true super car here.

CAN a tire be found adequate to the job?

The Gp4 cars attempted this and I suppose were successful enough.

Problem is though that those cars were raced under much closer to ideal conditions than a street car is exposed to.

Again. Maybe it is better to build very specific and calculated limitations into a street vehicle?

You can put the ultimate tire on a car, but it doesn't see the ultimate road 100% of the time.

This is all serious stuff to consider.

Don't worry. I'll keep posting until something comes up that we disagree on. It could be any minute.

quote:

Don't worry. I'll keep posting until something comes up that we disagree on. It could be any minute.

Finally answering Doug's question I missed from several pgs back-
"Bosswrench, Do you know what calipers were used with the 1.25 front rotors at LeMans?"

On the GR-4s, they originally used gigantic iron three-piston calipers similar to what was on the GT5 and GT5-S cars 10 years later. The smaller rear 3-piston brakes were sourced from Rolls-Royce, altered a bit for slightly larger rotors in back. GR-3 Club-racers also used iron 3-piston Girlings on all 4 corners, with the later pair-of-pliers e-brake system. These Girlings are incredibly heavy: when I mounted up a genuine GR-3 brake system on a '72 Pantera Judy & I were racing decades ago, I had to use both hands to hold one caliper!
ALL the race cars used 15" wheels and are still required to today by the vintage rules. So the 1.25" thick 'race' rotors are virtually the same OD as our 0.81" thick steet rotors and thus have the same mechanical leverage. Far as I remember, failing front bearings on gr-3s & GR-4s were not the problem; breaking stock rear axles after 3-4 hrs of track running was (and still is today)!

On spindles: early pushbuttons used a different casting in which the spindle was removeable; the spindle had a taper held in by a big nut on the backside. I suppose if one had such an upright, you could have a replacement spindle made of better steel & with bigger bearings. Not a direct swap: the early uprights used integral steering arms while all later front uprights use removeable steering arms & integral spindles. Dunno what front bearings were used on the earlies. But as Steve W said, that spindle is no longer generally available except as recycled parts from junkers. Early car's mating a-arms were different (wider), too.

Thanks for your input BW.

This is one of the things that was very hard to research.

I finally came to the conclusion that some of them had the aluminum Girling 18/4, 16/4 units, front and back.

This is what the 68 gt40 "Gulfs" ran. The earlier GT40's ran the aluminum Cobra Girlings.

In investigating it appears that the front has the same braking power as the stock caliper. It is used so they could use a 1.25" thick rotor for race reasons. They don't give greater braking power though.

The rears 16/4's were used for the same reason, to use 1.25" rotors.

Aluminum on these calipers helps tremendously.

I can't immagine why they ever used the iron Girlings on the race cars to begin with.

I can make you a better set up with the big Lincoln calipers and T-bird rotors.

That set up would really be nice with aluminum calipers. Don't you know some of those showed up on the race cars too?

quote:

The Can-Am cars had huge brakes, reduced weight, and huge horsepower engines, for their era. 600hp then was not obtainable by everyone. Now more than that is in street cars.

The formula didn't work. They ran off the tracks in the corners and into any obstruction they could find.

Not sure I would describe the brakes on CanAm cars as massive. My McLaren M12 came standard from Mclaren with only a 12" vented rotors front and rear with Girling 16-3-LA Calipers. These relatively modest rotors and calipers had a huge advantage in their application...the M12 weighed in at ONLY 1300-1400 pounds total...so you didn't need such huge brakes. The CanAm car had the same wheel size limitations we do as they ran 15" wheels and tires. Can't comment on what the Lola's or Shadows or other CanAm cars were running for brakes but since the McLarens dominated from 66-72 when the turbo Panzers came on the scene, it's safe to assume that the McLarens had the best of the best.

As far as the Can Am formula not working??? HUH? So today's F1 formula doesn't work also because they run off corners and hit tire barriers too? The CanAm cars were on the edge of so many major break through's in automotive design...this one series probably advanced automotive engineering more than any series (IMO). It was unlimited in design restrictions. The reason they went off the track is because they were at the edge of aerodynamic stability. Read about problems caused by "wake turbulence" while running behind another car, it moved cars across the track...it's wasn't a braking problem. Or they would use too much throttle over a rise on a high speed section of the track causing the nose to lift 1/2 to 1" at 150+mph and the car turned into a wing, like so many cars do today. My M12 would do 0-100 mph and back to 0 mph in about 8 seconds and the I know that under braking there were more G's developed than under acceleration.

Think of how much more sheer braking power Scotts Pantera has today compared to the CanAm cars!!! But it's all about weight(IMO). The McLaren F1 cars of that era were only running 11" rotors, but the cars weighed a mere 1100 pounds!

quote:

Just like there is a practical horsepower limit to these cars, in that over a certain number the car just won't go any faster, there is a practical limit to tires, and BRAKES.

Totally agree here. For those of us with narrow body cars we can't just shove more rubber under the car to offset too much braking capacity. We're stuck with 225's to 245's in the front unless we flare the car, and up to a 335's in the rear. I'm running a 245-40/17 front, 285-40/18 rear. I'll be less prone to lock up in the front when compared to a 225 tire...but am probably much more likely to lock the rear tires compared to someone running 335's, hence my need for a bias adjuster. Could I throw a 335 under the rear, yep, but I'd rather go smaller to keep balanced understeer/oversteer on handling given the limits of my front tire size.

Everything is balance...too bad we have to work normal jobs....sure would be fun to have a 20-30 person team with unlimited $$$$ engineering and testing all these combos. Sorry I'm dreaming again. Great discussion!!

A pit crew is what I need, to work on what research and development comes up with...definitely.

I could use a skid pad too. Just like Mark
Donahue and Roger Penske built in the back of his truck dealership for the Camaro.

Maybe a test driver for me too? I get dizzy just going around in a circle.

quote:

Just a comment about front brake performance. I have the Byers, Willwood 4 piston calipers and hats all around, and the larger rotors up front. Had to add a proportioner (pressure reducer) on the front circuit because the front brakes were too powerful. Locked up easily.

Dave, do you have a picture the proportioning valve you put in - how and which?

I have the same set-up from Byars as yours - and the same problem with balance towards the fronts.

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by Push1267:

quote:

Just a comment about front brake performance. I have the Byers, Willwood 4 piston calipers and hats all around, and the larger rotors up front. Had to add a proportioner (pressure reducer) on the front circuit because the front brakes were too powerful. Locked up easily.

Dave, do you have a picture the proportioning valve you put in - how and which?

I have the same set-up from Byars as yours - and the same problem with balance towards the fronts.

Thanks

It is a simple Wilwood unit. It is between the front master output and the front brake line. I believe I have mine turned down 6 full turns.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/wil-260-8419

quote:

Originally posted by 1973 Pantera:
Does anyone have any documented incidents of any Pantera spindle failures over the last 40 years?

I've never heard of one.

Yes. There have been examples of outer bearing failure and spindle failure on Pantera front uprights on race cars. But failure is only one aspect to consider in race conditions. The other is flexing of the hub assembly relative to the spindle. For race cars you need go minimize this to improve handling and steering. To solve this problem (improve handling, steering responsiveness and eliminating bearing failure) you can fit a spindle stiffener, larger bearing hubs and a bearing spacer to set the pre-load. You can buy these kits with chromemoly hubs from www.msfracingcomponents.com.au

Fit once and never worry again.

Doug wrote- "Aluminum on these calipers helps tremendously.
I can't immagine why they ever used the iron Girlings on the race cars to begin with."

It was a 70's/'80s thing. Early aluminum calipers were quite light compared to iron, but nowhere near as stiff. Alloy calipers flexed enough that heavier iron calipers were sometimes retrofitted in race cars to control pad skewing and odd/premature wear patterns. Nowadays with computerized FEA to predict what will happen under race conditions, places that make aluminum race calipers have the best of both: adequate stiffness AND lightness. But 40 yrs ago, not possible.

DeTomasos still sometimes lose front wheel bearings on the street at more-or-less legal speeds, but its usually due to lack of grease and/or service. OEM front wheel bearings are the same p/n as mid-'60s Ford 3/4 ton pickup trucks, so I don't think bearing strength is the issue. I've been on runs where stone-stock Panteras and Mangustas lost front wheel bearings (same part#, BTW), and from a yard away you could smell burned grease. OEM wheel bearing nuts used race-inspired 'staking' to set bearing clearance, and were one-shot-only. At $16 each, most guys tried to get more than one use out of them, often with bad results. Later, Ford/DeTomaso drilled the spindles (and a lot of us did, too) for cotter pins. But the OEM non-castellated nuts didn't allow much tolerance so you needed shim washers. The very late sheet-metal castellation piece with drillings, cotter pins and shim washers helped a little.

A final consideration: for a decade now, I 'borrowed' a successful design and have been scratch-building 'infinitely-adjustable' front wheel-bearing nuts for a few Pantera friends, to allow them to set exactly the wheel bearing clearances they need without drilling, cotter-pins or shims. So far, no failures.

The reason I asked is because I noticed the similarity of the front spindles on the Pantera and the 65-69 Mustangs and Cougars.

When Ford went from the 70 series tires to the 60's series there was almost immediately an issue with spindle failure.

The solution for Ford was to enlarge the outside diameter of the spindle. The racers immediately took advantage of these as well.


Similarity does not indicate the exact situation. There is a big difference between the Mustang with close to a 60/40 weight bias and the Pantera which is 40/60.



My car had the front locking nuts. It was very simple for me to change these over to the cotter pin retainer like used on the Mustang. Those bearings for me, since I have experience with those, I can get the bearing preload perfect every time on.

That is not a difficult change over at all. In fact, it is a very easy and simple one.



As far as the aluminum calipers instead of the iron, again, I noticed the difference from the street Cobras to the Comp Cobras which used the aluminum calipers.

I also noticed that some of the factory Gp4 Panteras were using the aluminum Girling 18/4, 16/4 calipers which are intended for the 1.25" vented rotors.

These are the same calipers used on the 68 and later GT40's, also know as the Gulfs.

Noted also used on other late 60's early 70's GT race cars, like the Lola T70 and the 935 Porsche. Maybe the 917 whale tales too? Something in the period rules about limiting braking ability for safety reasons? Very strange. How does that slow down the cars? The rules comity must have voted on that one at a wine tasting festival? In any event, aluminum calipers can't be all bad?



I agree that unless someone gave you a set of the aluminum Girlings for free, they are disproportionately expensive compared to say the Wilwood, the most logical way to go with brakes right now is with a set of Wilwood's and leave the existing spindles and bearings alone and just pack 'em with grease once in a while.

Even switching to the 65 Mustang vented rotors no longer makes much sense since they have become collectors items? They were just a cheap substitute for the stock Girling rotors to begin with.


The real issue is that far too many Panteras are being put away for 5 or 10 years at a time then just be pulled out of storage and driven without any maintenance at all. You need to pack the bearings annually as far as I am concerned.

Dave -thanks for the info. I'ts on my summit wish list.

Kristian