Which Brake Is This?

[twenty mike mike]

My '69 was originally a 6 cylinder, which now has a different K frame. I don't know which car it came from, and I don't know if the brakes came with the K frame.

Shouldn't Chargers have trailing calipers? This is the left front.

[hemi71x]

With those two piece rotors, that set up is originally from a 70-72 B body, and 70-72 E Body car.

[twenty mike mike]

Thanks. That fat caliper mounted in front makes it impossible to install a sway bar. 

I suppose sourcing original parts to make it a trailing caliper system is a non starter.

[maxwellwedge]

Maybe you have a 70-71 K-Frame? That would allow a 70-up sway bar.

[twenty mike mike]

Maybe you have a 70-71 K-Frame? That would allow a 70-up sway bar.

How can I tell? BTW, the K Frame isn't drilled for sway bar mounting brackets and the LCAs don't have end link attachments, so I have to install L brackets for the links.

[MrSnicks]

Looks like the setup on my wife's 1971 Dodge Charger. Pin type calipers and probably the smaller diameter rotors. The rotors on hers were not 2-piece, but single piece.

Patrick

[hemi71x]

Thanks. That fat caliper mounted in front makes it impossible to install a sway bar. 

I suppose sourcing original parts to make it a trailing caliper system is a non starter.

Just swap the spindles and calipers, from side to side, then they will face the rear.
Use an appropriate brake hose, and your good to go.
No biggie, easy swap.

[Budnicks]

Thanks. That fat caliper mounted in front makes it impossible to install a sway bar. 

I suppose sourcing original parts to make it a trailing caliper system is a non starter.

Just swap the spindles and calipers, from side to side, then they will face the rear.
Use an appropriate brake hose, and your good to go.
No biggie, easy swap.

& lower ball joints...

[ACUDANUT]

Thanks. That fat caliper mounted in front makes it impossible to install a sway bar. 

I suppose sourcing original parts to make it a trailing caliper system is a non starter.

Just swap the spindles and calipers, from side to side, then they will face the rear.
Use an appropriate brake hose, and your good to go.
No biggie, easy swap.

& lower ball joints...

I agree, but what do you mean lower ball joints...What else would you use ?

[Budnicks]

Thanks. That fat caliper mounted in front makes it impossible to install a sway bar. 

I suppose sourcing original parts to make it a trailing caliper system is a non starter.

Just swap the spindles and calipers, from side to side, then they will face the rear.
Use an appropriate brake hose, and your good to go.
No biggie, easy swap.

& lower ball joints...

I agree, but what do you mean lower ball joints...What else would you use ?

just make sure you use the lower ball joints & steering arms for the rights, on the right side & the lefts on the left side, is what I meant, probably should have been more specific or they would be pointing the wrong direction, for rear steer, when swapping the spindles from right to left & vissa versa...

[ACUDANUT]

So you are saying you have to change/swap the lowers also ?

[Budnicks]

So you are saying you have to change/swap the lowers also ?

yeah the lower ball joints have an steering arm on them, they are side specific/oriented, they need to point toward the rear, not a different brand or style....

[ACUDANUT]

Got it. I will be doing this same swap in the future. 

[twenty mike mike]

Thanks, guys. What a coincidence, I need ball joints, and control arm bushings, anyway! 

Hemi71x, here's a bonus Phantom pic for you that I took in Feb '78.

[ACUDANUT]

Did that one have the gun ?  I know the "experts" at first thought it was out dated.  I love the F-4's.  I wish they did not leave a exhaust trail though. 

[twenty mike mike]

Only the E model had the nose gun and that's a J. We got the J79-10B smokeless engines (no, really) halfway through my tour with that squadron. It didn't clean up the engines completely, but it made a huge difference.

[Budnicks]

here's a bonus Phantom pic for you that I took in Feb '78.

Sorry I'm treading off topic but, was it true, that those F-4 or is it a 104 Phantoms didn't have guns on them, in the Viet Nam era, that the Defense dept. Air Force & Navy ordered them with out {machine} guns, because they thought the air to air "gun" type dog fight battles, were a thing of the past, they only carried missiles/bombs & weren't you a sitting duck, with out guns after the missiles/bombs were gone...

[hemi71x]

You DON'T change the lower ball joints.
No need to. Thet stay connected to the lower control arm.
The spindle bolts to the ball joint, no matter which  side you mount them on.

Thank's for the photo.
Worked the RF-4C's (aircraft mechanic/flight line crew chief) during my tour in Germany in the early 70's.

[twenty mike mike]

here's a bonus Phantom pic for you that I took in Feb '78.

Sorry I'm treading off topic but, was it true, that those F-4 or is it a 104 Phantoms didn't have guns on them, in the Viet Nam era, that the Defense dept. Air Force & Navy ordered them with out {machine} guns, because they thought the air to air "gun" type dog fight battles, were a thing of the past, they only carried missiles/bombs & weren't you a sitting duck, with out guns after the missiles/bombs were gone...

F-4 Phantom, F-104 Starfighter. Initially, the Air Force called theirs the F-110, but shortly thereafter there was an agreement between the Air Force and the Navy to use common designations, so the F4H-1 and F-110 became the F-4 of varying models.

After the Korean War, with the advent of more advanced air search and track radar, and the air to air missiles to go with them, as well as heat-seeking air to air missiles, it was thought by the bigwigs that air to air gunnery was dead. That notion was quickly dispelled early in the Vietnam War, and the Air Force did get the F-4E model into the fray toward the end. In fact, there was at least one MiG gun kill by an F-4E using only the gun.

All aircraft are sitting ducks after running out of missiles or ammo, but it's the opportunity lost when a target presents itself at close range that is the issue. There are surprisingly few rounds available for the gun, but that's because 20mm rounds are pretty heavy.

The Navy couldn't use the F-4E due to its heavy nose as a result of the gun installation. The F-4B/J needed a nose strut extension so it could get the nose up properly after a catapult launch as it was...with the extra weight of the gun, that wasn't going to happen.

[John_Kunkel]

All aircraft are sitting ducks after running out of missiles or ammo,

Tell that to the kamikaze. 

[twenty mike mike]

All aircraft are sitting ducks after running out of missiles or ammo,

Tell that to the kamikaze. 

The exception that proves the rule. 

[twenty mike mike]

Worked the RF-4C's (aircraft mechanic/flight line crew chief) during my tour in Germany in the early 70's.

You were lucky! Imagine sitting astride the turtleback in a pitching, rolling sea, trying to spin that speed wrench with freezing hands...   

[Budnicks]

here's a bonus Phantom pic for you that I took in Feb '78.

Sorry I'm treading off topic but, was it true, that those F-4 or is it a 104 Phantoms didn't have guns on them, in the Viet Nam era, that the Defense dept. Air Force & Navy ordered them with out {machine} guns, because they thought the air to air "gun" type dog fight battles, were a thing of the past, they only carried missiles/bombs & weren't you a sitting duck, with out guns after the missiles/bombs were gone...

F-4 Phantom, F-104 Starfighter. Initially, the Air Force called theirs the F-110, but shortly thereafter there was an agreement between the Air Force and the Navy to use common designations, so the F4H-1 and F-110 became the F-4 of varying models.

After the Korean War, with the advent of more advanced air search and track radar, and the air to air missiles to go with them, as well as heat-seeking air to air missiles, it was thought by the bigwigs that air to air gunnery was dead. That notion was quickly dispelled early in the Vietnam War, and the Air Force did get the F-4E model into the fray toward the end. In fact, there was at least one MiG gun kill by an F-4E using only the gun.

All aircraft are sitting ducks after running out of missiles or ammo, but it's the opportunity lost when a target presents itself at close range that is the issue. There are surprisingly few rounds available for the gun, but that's because 20mm rounds are pretty heavy.

The Navy couldn't use the F-4E due to its heavy nose as a result of the gun installation. The F-4B/J needed a nose strut extension so it could get the nose up properly after a catapult launch as it was...with the extra weight of the gun, that wasn't going to happen.

Thanks for the clarification... that helps