Brake shoe sizes

ascari

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
78
Reaction score
31
Location
USA
This evening I decided to replace the front brake shoes and wheel bearings on my brand new 1966 New Yorker four door. According to the Mopar service manual PDF my car should use 11x3 shoes, so that's what I was prepared to do.

After popping the drums I noticed that my car actually has 2 1/2 inch shoes. So I stopped and went down the 11 inch brake shoe rabbit hole. Turns out there are at least six(!) different types of front shoes for a -66: 3.07, 3, 2 3/4, 2.57, 2 1/2 and 2 3/16. The -66 parts book was great for confusing me even more, LOL! I give up.

Can somebody educate me on which shoes I should use on a -66 4 door NY? Are some of the sizes interchangeable? If so, would it be better to go big? Somewhere I saw a reference to early versus late cars, is that what's going on with my car? (Built June 22nd 1966 I think?) I kind of like having working brakes, and I want to do this right. :)
 
The cars typically did not have 11x3 shoes on the front except on some police cruisers and station wagons or taxis. The 11 x 2.5 would be standard on most that were standard performance models. 11 x 2.75 on some 383 and 440 cars. Shoes as noted do not interchange as the drums and backing plates are different. Put back whatever is on the car now.

Dave
 
The cars typically did not have 11x3 shoes on the front except on some police cruisers and station wagons or taxis. The 11 x 2.5 would be standard on most that were standard performance models. 11 x 2.75 on some 383 and 440 cars. Shoes as noted do not interchange as the drums and backing plates are different. Put back whatever is on the car now.

Dave

Dave, I have to disagree. My experience is that most slab era C Body cars have 11 x 2 3/4 front shoes and drums. All of the 68 Furys that I have owned including 318 and 383-2V cars had this size front brakes. A 66 300 4dr 383-4V that I used to own had 11 x 3 front brakes and I suspect that a 66 New Yorker would have 11 x 3 front brakes.

Ascari, I would measure the brake surface on your front drums. My guess is that someone put the wrong parts in your car at some point but with mother MOPAR you never know what they did on the assembly line when they ran our of parts.
 
FuryGT is far far closer to the truth than Oregon boy....
Call me when you wake up -- I will walk you through EXACTLY what has to be done for success....
Yours, Craig
 
I’ve had a many 67 & 68 New Yorkers which are 440’s and they all have had 11x3” front brakes and 11x2.2” rears. (Yep 2.5”)

He is correct that you cannot change the shoe width. The top pin on the backing plates is set for the width.
 
Last edited:
And, KEEP IN MIND, that I have N.O.S. ++ Asbestos ++ which is 50 times better than this new garbage of today ---
which is not allowed to be manufactured any longer -- because of Asbestos Laws.....
But, it is okay for us to transact on it -- because it is "grandfathered in" and was manufactured before the statutes took effect....
And ++ N.O.S. ++ Asbestos ++ is fifty times better than this garbage of today --- and is the ONLY smooooooooth braking surface...... Call me.....
 
Ascari,
Just noticed that you wanted to replace bearings &seals, also.....
I have U.S.A. bearings &seals --- don't use the Chineseum crap that is all over the universe... These cars are too heavy for that.... You will destroy a hub.

Haven't heard from you yet --- do you have a phone??
If not, you can probably borrow some kids easier than finding a pay phone these days.....
Yours, Craig
 
Hey mobileparts - sounds like you really, really, really want to sell me some shoes, LOL! :) Couldn't call you today, I was out in the sticks working all day with no Internet and just got back in and saw this. I'll give you a call in the morning some time.
 
OK, I have to admit that I'm even more confused after reading mobilepart's post. That doesn't quit pan with the factory manuals for -66 or -65. (See picture) According to the 1966 Chrysler manual I should use 3 inch front AND rear unless it's a Newport. Just measured what came off my car again, and the front shoes are definitely 2 1/2 inch, i.e. neither 3 nor 2 3/4. What's more, the drums are a tad over 3 1/4 deep so I gather they would accommodate 3 inch shoes?

Starting to think FuryGT is right somebody put on the wrong shoes, but according to some of the posts that's wouldn't be a possibility either since they wouldn't fit the backing plate?

BTW mobileparts, left a message on your voice mail.

From1966ChryslerShopManual.png
 
Guys read this and think this over.

You cannot just put on whatever width shoes you want because your drum is wide. The big pin at the top of the backing plate dictates the shoe width that will mount on the backing plate.

The spine of the shoe is centered. The pin height won’t work on a wider or narrower shoe. It will only work with the correct width shoe it is made for. Have you seen a shoe where the spine is not centered?

Do you know how much trouble you’d have if your shoe and drum was the exact same width? No you don’t, because they don’t make brakes that way for good reason. Noise, heat, pulling, etc. so many customer complaints, never Ending!
 
Last edited:
413 I agree 100% with what you're saying.

Are we actually full circle and I should go hunting for 2 1/2 inch front shoes since that's what came off the car? Nobody seems to think that's what should go on the front under any circumstances, but maybe it should? Or do I actually have the ultimate Frankencar?
 
2 1/2” shoes were on there. If they were on there correctly then yes that is what goes on there. Go try a bigger shoe, it won’t work out very good.

The car is 53 years old. Who knows what’s been changed. Either by a owner or the factory.
 
413 I agree 100% with what you're saying.

Are we actually full circle and I should go hunting for 2 1/2 inch front shoes since that's what came off the car? Nobody seems to think that's what should go on the front under any circumstances, but maybe it should? Or do I actually have the ultimate Frankencar?

Can you post some photos with the old shoes in place and a tape measure on the shoes? A photo showing the top pin in relation to the shoes would be helpful.

Just my 2 cents but if some dumba$$ put 2.5" drums and shoes on a '66 New Yorker I know I would want them changed back to the correct 3" wide shoes and drums etc. (or convert to discs and make life easier and safer in the long run).
 
413 Here are some pics. Not sure how useful they are - the perspective makes it look like I have 3 1/2 inch shoes! :)

My game plan plan is to go with discs eventually, but I want to drive it a little first and see what else it needs. Wanted good brakes and fresh bearings first since that's a big deal for obvious reasons. Thinking about changing priorities and do discs first, but I'm afraid that's just another can of worms.

P1050746.JPG
P1050744.JPG
 
Dave, I have to disagree. My experience is that most slab era C Body cars have 11 x 2 3/4 front shoes and drums. All of the 68 Furys that I have owned including 318 and 383-2V cars had this size front brakes. A 66 300 4dr 383-4V that I used to own had 11 x 3 front brakes and I suspect that a 66 New Yorker would have 11 x 3 front brakes.

Ascari, I would measure the brake surface on your front drums. My guess is that someone put the wrong parts in your car at some point but with mother MOPAR you never know what they did on the assembly line when they ran our of parts.
413 Here are some pics. Not sure how useful they are - the perspective makes it look like I have 3 1/2 inch shoes! :)

My game plan plan is to go with discs eventually, but I want to drive it a little first and see what else it needs. Wanted good brakes and fresh bearings first since that's a big deal for obvious reasons. Thinking about changing priorities and do discs first, but I'm afraid that's just another can of worms.

View attachment 307964 View attachment 307965

Those shoes were installed by an "*** monkey garage" to reference one of the previous posts. Note the shoes are on backwards, larger shoe should be mounted towards the rear of the car. You need to measure from lining edge to lining edge as those look like 2.75" shoes from the photo. Take one off and measure it that way to confirm. Also note that the shoes are riding correctly at the top pin so whatever size they are appears correct.

Dave
 
Dave, the more I dig into the car the more evidence of "a$$-monkery" I find. Part of the fun, I guess!

I just measured the shoes off the car using calipers lining edge to lining edge, and they are almost exactly 2 1/2. They do look a bit bigger in the pictures, though.

I wonder if those are rear shoes that for some reason ended up in the front? Don't know how to tell the difference on a C-body. Also I think there are two trailing shoes on the other side, another piece of evidence of not so skilled maintenance in the past. Now I'm super paranoid, and will tear into the rear brakes as soon as I'm done with the front whenever that will be. The car is out in the driveway since I figured this would be an afternoon's work, and I want to button her up before moving on to the next task. Best laid plans...
 
This would be an excellent time to replace all of the wheel cylinders, brake hoses and master cylinder and convert to DOT 5 brake fluid, especially if the car is going to spend winter hibernating. I have had DOT 5 in some of my cars for 20 years and have yet to have a fluid related failure. This conversion works best with everything new so there is no left over conventional brake fluid. The car still needs to be out of the weather because parking on the dirt will still degrade the brake system.

Dave
 
That's an interesting thought. I'm definitely replacing both front wheel cylinders, and if the pattern of "monkey wrenching" holds up for the rear they will have to go as well. It would probably make sense to go to a dual circuit master cylinder setup while I'm mucking around in this area anyway. Right now it's the stock MC.

Here we go again! And to think I had planned on throwing on some new brake shoes and go for a ride that same evening.
 
Back
Top