Sticky #5: Pantera Brakes

Noticed my pedal was drifting ever so slowly to the floor, and thought 'uh oh'. Time to consider my next project, like now. Appears to be the original booster and master.

So at minimum, a master cylinder is in my future, then the "while you're in there bug" bit me.

A daunting number of choices out there, and follwing a good bit of 'thread search', wanted to pose this to the experts:

1) I don't track the car at all.
2) Running stock 15s, but with 8 and 10 wide wheels.
3) Prefer 'stock' apperance in the trunk compartment, though a minor deviation not bothersome.
4) As all of us, would prefer to spend $0, but can stomach up to $2grand done, so likely not able to get the 'big buck brake kit'.

Noticed sponsors offer bigger bore master cylinders, with what is claimed as 'superior flow' and 'better feel'.

All advice gladly accepted. Will stop driving the car til this is resolved.
Original Post
Once the proportioning valve (which is installed in the front circuit) is removed from the car the Pantera braked very well for the early 1970s era ... but it didn't brake very well after repeated stops because the disks were not ventillated ... the brakes would fade due to heat. There really isn't anything wrong with the performance of the brake system hydraulically outside of the proportioning valve being installed in the front circuit. The front brakes are decent assemblies with 4 piston calipers. The rear brake assemblies however are very undersized.

Is an oem style master available from Steve Wilkinson? If so, my advice would be to buy one, disassemble it before you install it in your car, clean it thoroughly, inspect the bores, lube the parts properly & re-assemble it, fill the master with fresh brake fluid and bench bleed it before you install it in your Pantera.

_______________________________________________
Minimum brake upgrade:

  • remove the proportioning valve from the hydraulic brake system entirely
  • replace the master cylinder with an oem style master cylinder
  • rebuild the front calipers
  • replace the front disks with ventillated disks (early Mustang disks)
  • front brake pads are available from EBC, Raybestos, or Porterfield
    (I recommend ceramic pads for street cars)

amendment to list based on discussion in this thread:

  • replace the rear brake assemblies with the rear brake kit from SACC Restorations
    (the kit employs Wilwood 4 piston calipers)
  • retain the oem rear brake assemblies to use as parking brakes only

_______________________________________________

The money you spend on this brake restoration & upgrade is guaranteed to be money well spent.
You'll agree the first time you stop hard. The brakes shall feel "racier" and safer too.
You'll enjoy the brakes the Pantera should have been equipped with in the first place.
Its an invisble upgrade that won't detract from the original looks of your Pantera

Rock and Roll

-G
Hi Adams,

We can design a kit to upgrade as much or as little of the system as you wish (or your budget allows).

I completely agree with George that there is nothing wrong with the original hydraulics on the car after removing the stock proportioning valve.

We offer a complete brake upgrade for 15 inch wheels that includes 12.19 inch rotors. Drill, Slotted and Vented with a great looking black e-coating that gets removed immediately upon brake in. This gives a great contrast while providing rust protection on the non-contact areas of the rotors. That kit can be viewed at: http://pantera.saccrestorations.net/sak2001.html

Another option is simply upgrading just the rears. My recommendation is to go with the kit that provides a balanced system designed to work with the stock Pantera Master Cylinder. Our kits are all computer designed and track tested.

Take care, Scott
What are you looking to upgrade? Just Calipers? Would you like to upgrade just the rears? We can provide a kit designed for your needs.

I am not clear on what you are looking to accomplish? Are you only looking for a hydraulics upgrade?

The lowest cost and biggest bang for the buck, for a brake upgrade, is to remove the proportioning valve and then upgrade the rears to a 4 piston setup. Those 2 items alone will provide an unbelievable upgrade over stock!
I agree. Take the proportioning valve out. Why the factory felt they needed it is beyond me.
It is one strange Alien device.
I almost can see Dan Akroid with his Conehead makeup on saying that he was French being the engineer in charge, in between consuming mass quantities of beer that is?
Hum. A second thought was maybe it was Alejandro? He said he was from Argentina, but can he prove that? LOL.
quote:
Originally posted by Cowboy from Hell:
Picture 2. This proportioning valve (yellow arrow) is a little different configuration. But its in the same general place in the trunk.


I guess no one noticed the maxed out (1-1/2") pedal plate spacer on the foot box on this car did they? I did. I can't stand it when someone takes my advice?

Look closely. You will see the joint in the truck lining material and how close it is to the edge of the battery box cover. Big Grin
You can modify the proportioning valve to be nothing more then a pass through device so you don't have to worry about fittings etc...

You remove the valve, open it up and remove the part that regulates the pressure. It then becomes a non-functioning proportioning valve and you reinstall it and you're done...
quote:
Originally posted by Z06 Pantera:
You can modify the proportioning valve to be nothing more then a pass through device so you don't have to worry about fittings etc...

You remove the valve, open it up and remove the part that regulates the pressure. It then becomes a non-functioning proportioning valve and you reinstall it and you're done...


Simple solution. Still looks stock. Like I'm making money over here... to save up for some REAL BRAKES!

Thanks Scott, very much.
I used a parts-store Amercian-thread T-fitting and put on matching fittings w/ a double-flaring tool from the same store (cheapo import junk, not the $70 quality one) - it all works fine and you will only be spending about $25 total for tool, fittings, and T.
I'm going to redo my brakes also, but not sure removing the proportioning valve entirely is such good idea. Possibly replace it with a new adjustable one?

Usually the proportioning valve is put in to stop the rear tires from locking up before the fronts lock. Imagine you're hauling buns in a sweeping corner at 60 mph or higher, you hit the brakes hard, if the rear circuit gets too much pressure because you removed the proportioning valve the system lockups up the rear tires before the fronts, losing traction, sending the car into a spin. At least that's what the proportioning valve was supposed to do I thought. I had one of the McLaren Can Am cars and remember spending a lot of effort making sure the front and rear brake bias locked the fronts first, leaving the rears still turning.

Maybe if you are running 335's in the rear and 225's in front you have so much rubber on the ground in the rear that the brakes won't lock the rears before the fronts...but normally that what most manufactures do. I had a Fiat Spider in college that had a variable proportioning valve that was actuated by lift in the rear of the car...as you hit the brakes and the front of the car would squat(planting the front tires giving more traction) and the rear would start to rise(giving less traction), the proportioning valve would gradually lessen the rear pressure to stop the locking of the rear tires.

I have heard from Steve Wilkinson that he sells a 1" master that gives the brake system a much better feel with stock calipers.
Tom,

The stock proportioning valve in the Pantera reduced the line pressure to the front calipers, not to the rears.

quote:
I have heard from Steve Wilkinson that he sells a 1" master that gives the brake system a much better feel with stock calipers.

An increase in master cylinder bore will result in less pedal travel ("better feel"), and an increase in pedal effort (as in push harder).

John
quote:
Originally posted by Tom@Seal Beach:

Usually the proportioning valve is put in to stop the rear tires from locking up before the fronts lock.



That's correct.

If the rear tires don't lock-up with pressure to the front brakes reduced by a proportioning valve, there is no way they will lock up with full pressure applied to the front brakes by removal of the proportioning valve. The balance of braking front to rear moves more to the front when the proportioning valve is removed.

Removal of the proportioning valve is one of the oldest traditional mods to the Pantera, its a proven mod that has been performed for 40 years. Its nothing new, controversial, or dangerous. That's why vendors like Wilkinson have kits for performing the mod. Full pressure can be applied to the front brakes, allowing it to stop more quickly, with more stopping power. The braking performance (and therefore the safety) of your Pantera is enhanced by the proportioning valve's removal. Lots of owners have performed the mod, if you search the forum you'll find many recommendations for performing it, you won't find one complaint or horror story.

My Pantera has a Wilwood system. 12.75" rotors at all 4 corners, 4 piston calipers at all 4 corners, same size pads & pad material at all 4 corners. But the caliper pistons are smaller in the rear, only 65% of the piston area as the front. It has no proportioning valve, but it performs perfectly. I have flogged the car at over 100 mph on mountain roads, performed emergency stops, I've tried to make the rears lock up, but they never have. Brake systems don't necessarily "need" proprtioning valves. The Pantera's oem rear brakes are so undersized compared to the front brakes there is no way they will lock-up before the fronts.

-G
I am no expert and don't want to get into an all out argument, but there is a growing population that now does not advocate the removal of the proportioning valve.

As stated the Pantera valve is in the front brakes. More traditionally a proportioning valve would be in the rear braking system, to limit rear braking so the rears cannot lock before the fronts. However the Pantera front application is key to why it should be left alone in a stock braking system.

As G says the Pantera rear brakes are undersized in comparison to the front, the proportioning valve was inserted to compensate (limit) the front braking power to be more in line with the rear i.e. a matched system. When you remove that limitation front braking efficiency increases and yes the brakes feel better from a pedal persepctive, but you effectively now have two wheel braking as there is no restriction and all the stopping power is to the front brakes, you'll never ever lock up the rears because there is now close to zero rear braking efficiency. That is not a good scenario, the measure should not be just not locking up the rears, a good braking system should lock up the rears but just after the fronts.

Just my 2 cents
Julian
quote:
the measure should not be just not locking up the rears, a good braking system should lock up the rears but just after the fronts.


I think for the most part we are all in agreement. Removing the proportioning valve alone (without making an improvement in the rear) may not be a good idea. BUT, with the rears improved the proportioning valve SHOULD be removed.

It is all about balance. Every car should be evaluated based on it own configuration (weight distribution, tire size, etc...)

When we decided to get into brakes be did A LOT of testing to backup what most are saying here. Some people forget that the proportioning valve is in the front circuit on a Pantera.

Bottom line is a balanced system will not require a proportioning valve. The quickest and cheapest method for a stock Pantera brake system upgrade is to remove the proportioning valve and upgrade the rear brakes. It is amazing how this inexpensive change provides dramatic results.

Scott
quote:


Originally posted by Joules5:

there is a growing population that now does not advocate the removal of the proportioning valve.



Growing population sounds like a nice way to give more weight to the opinion of a few people.

It appears this "growing population" advocates retention of the proportioning valve based on a theory. A "real" problem caused by its removal was not mentioned, the theory is leaving it in results in better balance. I'd like to rephrase that theory if I may. "The rear brakes are inadequate, so we should reduce the effectiveness of the front brakes so they are more balanced with the rears". But guys ... making the front brakes less powerful means less braking performance! Which is better, two inadequate brakes, or four inadequate brakes?

Removing the proportioning valve measurably shortens the braking distances. That's why owners have been doing it for 40 years. Control while braking is not compromised either. It does not create a two wheel braking situation, the pressure to the rear circuit doesn't change, and the weight on the rear wheels remains the same. The rears are braking just as hard either way. If balanced braking means longer braking distances, then I choose more powerful braking over better balanced braking.

Reducing the power of the front circuit to "balance" the braking front to rear is going about it the wrong way! Wouldn't it be better to increase the power of the rear circuit? I may well agree with Chris that a rear brake upgrade will improve the Pantera's braking performance, but I am not in agreement that removal of the proportioning valve without a rear brake upgrade is a bad idea. I can't go that far Chris.

-G
quote:
I am not in agreement that removal of the proportioning valve without a rear brake upgrade is a bad idea. I can't go that far Chris.


I actually agree with you completely George. Notice how I said "May not be a good idea". With it's removal the rears are braking the same as before. As you said, the fronts are simply improved. How can anyone argue that an improvement in front brake performance is a bad thing... Smiler
My two cents.

How can it be a bad idea to have the best brakes one can in a car?
You would put the best tires, and engine that you can afford in. Why not brakes to?

For the time, the brakes new were nothing more then adequate.

Why Detomaso was married to the rear configuration is beyond me. It makes no sense except for production cost reasons.
I interpret the front proportioning valve as an attempt to cover up the inadequacy of the rear.

Just like it costs money to go fast and some say how fast can you afford to go, it isn't cheap to do brakes either.

Depending on the criteria controlled by the cars owner, such as wheels and tires, there are going to be a lot of options for brakes.

Some have tried to package a brake system at a reasonable cost that has been engineered to a degree and is ready to bolt on with no trial and error. That's great.

Probably everyone is going to have a critique of them in one form or another?

The only thing really that we can agree upon on brakes is that there are options and you don't have to stay with the stock system.

I think virtually all responsibly engineered replacement systems available now are going to be superior to the original.

For me, the only question is how much I can afford to spend on brakes since I feel strongly that the originals on my car must be upgraded in some significant way soon.
Like I said I'm no expert, but I as one of a "few people" voicing an opinion would be interested to see some skid pad testing in wet & dry conditions to see how overall braking is affected. I suspect that the seat of the pants evaluation has typically involved stomping on the brakes in a straight line on a dry road. Maybe that is okay as most Pantera's don't see a wet road ever anyway.

We are all in agreement that upgraded and balanced brakes are ultimately the answer. Replacing the proportioning valve with a modern adjustable one would likely be a good compromise with stock calipers IMO.

Julian
quote:
How can anyone argue that an improvement in front brake performance is a bad thing...


Removing proportioning valve moves balance towards the front. All agree?

If balance is right from the start, then it's a bad thing. If balance is too much to the rear from the start, then it's a good thing. All agree?

My view: If you change nothing else (like calipers and disc sizes) then you assume to know things the factory didn't, if you decide to remove the proportioning valve (and thereby change the brake balance). Do you? Probably not.
People that remove the proportioning valve say that they feel the car brakes better, well the front end does, and that can be felt as hard firm braking, the rear wheels contribute less. My first Pantera had had the proportioning valve removed by previous owner, everything else on the brakes looked original. In the rain the front wheels would lock and skid over the pavement and rear wheels didn't really contribute that much. It was terrible.

If on the other hand you upgrade brakes with a vendor kit, you should remove the proportioning valve because their kits are balanced wihout a proportioning valve (I assume Smiler)
I don't even know how it works. How can you change pressure from left to right in the front?
That's BS.

All it is doing is softening the pedal and killing total pressure to the front.

Take the thing out of the system and throw it over the fence at the Chevy guy. It is garbage.

It is not a resale feature on a car.

The stock rear brakes are so weak, no proportioning valve will help balance anything unless you put bigger brakes in the rear.

The rear caliper is a go cart caliper. That's where the thing belongs.
quote:
Originally posted by Cowboy from Hell:

Growing population sounds like a nice way to give more weight to the opinion of a few people.

It appears this "growing population" advocates retention of the proportioning valve based on a theory. A "real" problem caused by its removal was not mentioned, the theory is leaving it in results in better balance. I'd like to rephrase that theory if I may. "The rear brakes are inadequate, so we should reduce the effectiveness of the front brakes so they are more balanced with the rears". But guys ... making the front brakes less powerful means less braking performance! Which is better, two inadequate brakes, or four inadequate brakes?

Removing the proportioning valve measurably shortens the braking distances. That's why owners have been doing it for 40 years. Control while braking is not compromised either. It does not create a two wheel braking situation, the pressure to the rear circuit doesn't change, and the weight on the rear wheels remains the same. The rears are braking just as hard either way. If balanced braking means longer braking distances, then I choose more powerful braking over better balanced braking.

Reducing the power of the front circuit to "balance" the braking front to rear is going about it the wrong way! Wouldn't it be better to increase the power of the rear circuit? I may well agree with Chris that a rear brake upgrade will improve the Pantera's braking performance, but I am not in agreement that removal of the proportioning valve without a rear brake upgrade is a bad idea. I can't go that far Chris.

-G


George,

It's not theory--it's fact.

The stock proportioning valve is actually a pressure-reduction valve. By having different-sized pistons inside, it takes X psi input and delivers Y psi (lower) output.

You advocate taking the thing out with the argument that people have been doing it for a long time. Well, if you look at the back issues of PI and the POCA newsletter from the 1970s and 1980s, you'll see a LOT of (shall we say highly questionable) things that people did a long time ago. Just because it was done a long time ago, doesn't mean it was smart.

With a given amount of pedal pressure, the front and rear brakes will deliver a given amount of stopping performance. If you sabotage the system by removing the proportioning valve (for effectively, that's what it is, unless you've done something else too, such as adding a second rear caliper to each side, which was commonly done at the same time back in the day, and apparently works, from the one example I've driven with that setup), then the front brakes will become more effective with a given amount of pedal pressure. To the (people who only drive their cars gently, and never have to make a panic stop or use the brakes at anywhere near max effectiveness), that sounds like an improvement. But anybody who actually drives his Pantera hard (meaning using the brakes at or close to their design limit) will soon discover that the front brakes are now overly sensitive. Simply put, they will lock prematurely, relative to the rears. Whereas before, it took a healthy amount of pedal pressure to generate wheel lock, now a much lower amount will generate front-wheel lock, with virtually no performance at all coming from the rear brakes. Once the front brakes lock, you've lost all steering control, and you really can't apply any further braking to try to get the rear brakes to stop you, because now you're skidding. Don't forget, a skidding tire increases stopping distances by about 25% over a max-performing braking tire.

Do you even know how the proportioning valve came into being? When the Pantera prototypes were first undergoing testing (which was performed in the USA by a lab in Orange County, by the way--I have a copy of the full report), they suffered from too much front braking, and stopping distances were abysmal. While the proper solution would have been to install better rear calipers, the band-aid fix was to go for a pressure-reduction system for the fronts. Once that was implemented, although pedal pressure was a bit higher, stopping distances were a lot shorter.

And ultimately, that should be the ONLY goal.

I would agree that IF the rear calipers are upgraded and the front ones are left alone, the new system would probably benefit from the removal of the proportioning valve. Only testing would determine the ultimate truth of that however.

I would also agree that anybody who wants to do any really serious driving in a Pantera would be wise to toss the entire braking system over the hedge, and start over with any of the various options provided by the Pantera vendors. As long as the braking SYSTEM is fully engineered, and balanced, and not just a hodge-podge of spiffy-looking components randomly thrown together, then a proportioning valve would be rendered moot and unnecessary altogether.

My Pantera has a complete Wilwood-based system from Dennis Quella, with no proportioning valve, and the braking performance is light-years better than stock. However, that performance isn't really measured on the first stop. On the first stop, a bone-stock Pantera in proper working order (well, one with the pads warmed up) will stop just as well as one equipped with a killer brake system. It's only after repeated stops, where heat starts to come into play, that the aftermarket setups really start to earn their money. They do so via greater rotor mass and venting, which allows the fluid to remain at a reasonable temperature and thus allows the system to continue functioning as it should.

Stock brakes, when exposed to the rigors of track use, will eventually overheat to the point where they become useless until they have cooled off again.

A point worth mentioning is that a stock Pantera in good working order should be able to lock the brakes--lock all four of them if you're determined enough. If yours can't do that, then something is wrong with it. When was the last time you checked the effectiveness of your power brake booster? People seem to completely forget that the Pantera's setup relies on the proper performance of this critical component, and if it is compromised somehow, then braking performance will be measurably reduced (or put another way, braking effort will be measurably increased for a given amount of stopping performance). I suspect that a lot of the people who removed their proportioning valves, did so out of desperation for this very reason.

It's possible to wreck your stock brakes, using your engine.

Huh?

Right--just put a wild camshaft in there that reduces the available vacuum for the power brake booster, and suddenly, your brakes don't work properly anymore. It's easy to then go off on a wild goose chase, trying to fix something that really isn't broken, and condemning the factory engineering when in fact the owner has created the problem himself.

The bottom line is that advocating removal of the stock proportioning valve on a stock brake system that functions as it was when new, is a dangerous thing to do. The brakes should work properly. If they don't, then find out what's wrong with them, and fix it. Don't sacrifice total stopping performance for the sake of expediency and a false sense of security.

(Edit follows)

George, you present a false choice--between having two calipers that work correctly, or four that don't work correctly. Again, I maintain that neither of these is acceptable, and advocating one of these choices is dangerous. I believe that the ONLY acceptable choice is the unstated one, which is four calipers that work properly, as they did when new.

Contrary to your assertion, I'm not attacking any people personally--you included. I'm attacking a dangerous belief that has been held by some, for many years, and has the potential to result in unnecessary damage and/or injury if followed.

To criticize a bad idea is not the same as criticizing the person who espouses it.
It's actually not true that rear braking stays the same when removing the pressure limiting valve from the front circuit, for the simple reason of weight transfer. Sure, the pressure to the rear calipers stays the same but with increased front braking pressure comes increased weight transfer to the front of the car, and a corresponding decrease in traction at the rear. I'm sure removing the valve gives better pedal feel but front to rear balance is ultimately more important when it comes to stopping distances and more importantly, vehicle control while braking.
I am not sure why everyone is arguing about this stuff on this thread. As I read each persons response I am in agreement with them all. Yes, some people get more technical then others about how the system works, ie: weight transfer and the like, yet I believe we are all in agreement.

Balance is the key!!! To remove the stock proportioning valve without an improvement to the rears throws the balance off. The stock system is balanced so to speak with the valve in place.

If the valve is removed, the brake system should have some upgrades to bring it back into balance. Without going into the gnats ass detail on the braking system design, I believe we can sum up this thread by saying that we all agree the key to brake system performance is balance!

Scott
quote:
Contrary to your assertion, I'm not attacking any people personally--you included. I'm attacking a dangerous belief that has been held by some, for many years, and has the potential to result in unnecessary damage and/or injury if followed.


If this unsafe practice has been going on for years where are all the wrecked Panteras from inadequate brake performance due to this modification?

I personally have never heard of one incident. Prove this assertion with documentation and you will have provided the Pantera community with a tremendous service.
quote:
If this unsafe practice has been going on for years where are all the wrecked Panteras from inadequate brake performance due to this modification?

I personally have never heard of one incident. Prove this assertion with documentation and you will have provided the Pantera community with a tremendous service.


party applause
FWIW, I always advocate removing the non-adjustable proportioning valve, for the simple reason that it was designed for Goodyear Arriva belted bias tires or occasionally, Michelin XWX radials, both in rock-hard compounds and tiny contact-patch-sizes compared to what's common on most Panteras 40 years later. And a large number of cars now have bigger rotors, bigger calipers or Porterfield pads with much better frictional qualities than stock. Tires, rotors, pads and even adapting a different master cylinder or brake booster will all vary braking force at the tire/road surface.

Bottom line: if your Pantera has significantly different sized tires from stock, or different calipers or other brake parts, the stock valve is guaranteed to be set wrong, and cannot be adjusted.
As someone said, a sensible test is to remove the valve and try panic-stopping a few times in a deserted parking lot (for safety). If you like the improved braking action with no valve at all, fine- you're done except to get used to the improved stopping power.
But if with the valve gone, you CAN lock up a wheel or two and stability is iffy, an outside observer can tell you which one it was. Then if you wish to go a little further in optimizing your brakes, you can add a manually-adjustable proportioning valve and adjust it for your car with your tires and your brakes. If you later upgrade any of the parts involved, your manual valve can be readjusted to compensate.

One caveat: don't adjust your new valve for a ragged-edge brake balance. Road surfaces vary in friction and if you find yourself on concrete, or damp pavement or dusty blacktop, the friction may be different from your test surface, and again you'll be locking up one or more wheels- often at an inopportune time. Give yourself a little margin for changing conditions.
This has been and continues to be a superb discussion. I missed the 'angry' words, but still completely detect the passion and desire to give sound advice.

Prudence in this vital area (brakes!) means testing with and without the proportioning valve.

Right now, I have a creeping pedal, so the PV is not my initial issue, yet will get its due during the rework.

Chris Bell has been supremely helpful to me, reaching out personally to assist.

Looking forward to more discussion.
I will agree this has become a great discussion on vehicle dynamics, brakes, handling, etc. It really gets you thinking about what a manufacturer has to address to make a great car, especially a high performance sports car that does more than go fast in a straight line.

Below/attached is a comparison where the Pantera GTS was rated number 1...braking from 70 mph was 166ft (Thank you Mike @ The Pantera Place for the chart...hope it's ok to post that without your permission?) Were there caliper/rotor or master cylinder changes as the cars evolved? Did all the Pantera's have the PV in the front brake circuit?

This link shows the best braking cars over the past 40 years. Considering the older tire construction vs some of the numbers on this chart the Pantera GTS was pretty impressive.
http://www.caranddriver.com/fe...hort-stoppers-page-4

I'd be very interested to see how Georges/Mikes Wilwood braked cars compare and one of the Brembo big red calipered cars do compared to the GTS in the chart. The real test for most of these cars would be bringing it down from 150 repeatedly when the caliper and rotor changes really make a difference.

Love this thread...thanks for all the comments. I'm starting to think I may get my checkbook out and go see one of the vendors for a full caliper/rotor/MC kit.

Attachments

Photos (1)
quote:
Originally posted by Tom@Seal Beach:
I will agree this has become a great discussion on vehicle dynamics, brakes, handling, etc. It really gets you thinking about what a manufacturer has to address to make a great car, especially a high performance sports car that does more than go fast in a straight line.

Below/attached is a comparison where the Pantera GTS was rated number 1...braking from 70 mph was 166ft (Thank you Mike @ The Pantera Place for the chart...hope it's ok to post that without your permission?) Were there caliper/rotor or master cylinder changes as the cars evolved? Did all the Pantera's have the PV in the front brake circuit?

This link shows the best braking cars over the past 40 years. Considering the older tire construction vs some of the numbers on this chart the Pantera GTS was pretty impressive.
http://www.caranddriver.com/fe...hort-stoppers-page-4

I'd be very interested to see how Georges/Mikes Wilwood braked cars compare and one of the Brembo big red calipered cars do compared to the GTS in the chart. The real test for most of these cars would be bringing it down from 150 repeatedly when the caliper and rotor changes really make a difference.

Love this thread...thanks for all the comments. I'm starting to think I may get my checkbook out and go see one of the vendors for a full caliper/rotor/MC kit.


Great chart what year was this done. Goes to show that there is more to the pantera than the general unwashed believe. Who said these cars couldn't perform.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×