C-body Dakota Front Disc Brake Swap

clamp a 1 inch square tube to your steel bench top-----clamp both the spindle bottoms (2 holes) to the square---let the upper ball joint hole hang over the bench------measure from the edge of table to the center of the ball joint hole----------i first did it with upper control arms---laced up on a 1/2 inch steel rod through adjuster bushings---lined up on the steel bench edge--all the same side so they all leaned the same way-- 69 drum brake, 73 disc brake,74 disc brake,73 d100 disc brake------they were all within 1/16 of an inch----it told me chrysler was cheap and they didnt re-engineer stuff every year for every model....
 
Last edited:
drum brake spindles can be mounted on either side----disc brake spindles for A -B body cars can also be changed side to side with the caliper mounted up front of the spindle-----that tells me chrysler doesnt put castor in the spindle---tells me chrysler is cheap---again
 
ok-----i did a quick flintstones check between the 74 chrysler spindle and the dakota spindle-----the top of the dakota spindle is flat and 1/4" taller than the 74-----the center of ball joint holes the dakota +/- 3/16 inch deeper than the 74 meaning the 2 bottom bolts need a 3/16 thick washer to space them out-----also the 74 spindle top is sloped (decked) to the rear 2 degrees probably because upper control arm balljoint surface slopes to the rear----doesnt look to bad in a nut shell-----the only thing i couldnt figure was how straight the tapered ball joint holes are---wondering if that hole is also sloped 2 degrees....hey i have a spare set of 74 upper control arms spindles calipers and rotors--i think they cost me 120 at the pick a apart....
 
Last edited:
ok-----i did a quick flintstones check between the 74 chrysler spindle and the dakota spindle-----the top of the dakota spindle is flat and 1/4 taller than the 74-----the center of ball joint holes the dakota +/- 3/16 inch deeper than the 74 meaning the 2 bottom bolts need a 3/16 thick washer to space them out-----also the 74 spindle top is sloped (decked) to the rear 2 degrees probably because upper control arm balljoint surface slopes to the rear----doesnt look to bad in a nut shell-----the only thing i couldnt figure was how straight the tapered ball joint holes are---wondering if that hole is also sloped 2 degrees....hey i have a spare set of 74 upper control arms spindles calipers and rotors--i think they cost me 120 at the pick a apart....
Is it relevant to compare with 1974 spindles? I always heard that the C-body front suspension was redesigned for 1974, so 1974+ parts won't work to convert an older C-body to discs anyhow. I think you need to compare with a 1965-73 spindle.
 
well i previously said i did not have a loose 69 spindle to compare------i said i had a 74 and the dakota..........i have put 73 d100 spindles on my 69------i thought someone on this thread said they were putting 74 spindles on their 69----my measurements from a year ago made the 74 and d100 identical down to the bigger ball joints-----the upper control arms on the cars are all identical until you get to the bigger upper ball joint....
 
ok-----i did a quick flintstones check between the 74 chrysler spindle and the dakota spindle-----the top of the dakota spindle is flat and 1/4 taller than the 74-----the center of ball joint holes the dakota +/- 3/16 inch deeper than the 74 meaning the 2 bottom bolts need a 3/16 thick washer to space them out-----also the 74 spindle top is sloped (decked) to the rear 2 degrees probably because upper control arm balljoint surface slopes to the rear----doesnt look to bad in a nut shell-----the only thing i couldnt figure was how straight the tapered ball joint holes are---wondering if that hole is also sloped 2 degrees....hey i have a spare set of 74 upper control arms spindles calipers and rotors--i think they cost me 120 at the pick a apart....

Thank you for your back yard engineering expertise and checks....seems like you understand what is going on pretty well and I could deffer to your opinions and recommendations. :thumbsup:
 
Hey Guys, I still need a drum brake spindle to compare to the Dakota spindles.Does anyone have one that I can borrow for a few days?I will gladly pay shipping.Thanks
 
I know this is an old thread but I hope I get a response to my ???s. I am thinking of Dakota brake swap on my 68 Sport Fury as the thread explained. My question is can I use a 1999 Dakota ?????????
 
I know this is an old thread but I hope I get a response to my ???s. I am thinking of Dakota brake swap on my 68 Sport Fury as the thread explained. My question is can I use a 1999 Dakota ?????????
Definitely not, 97+ Dakota use a unitized hub and bearing unit with a 6 lug pattern, by using even 91-96 spindles you can back date them to 4.5x5 pattern as they use tapered roller bearings with a 1 piece rotor and hub unit.
 
I've owned my 93 Dakota since 1993. It now has 300k miles on it. The brakes are well maintained and in very good condition.
They are not adequate for the Dakota. They are not good brakes. I don't think they will bring any big block C body down from 80 very well, at all.

I would not use Dakota brakes on a big Chrysler.

The 93 Dakota uses an ingenious brake unloader for empty bed loads that increases the rear braking when the bed is loaded. The rear brakes apply a "lot" more braking force when loaded than any C body would ever apply. The C body rear brakes would never even come close. It's a very good system that accommodates the marginal Dakota front brakes.

The Dakota brakes would be fine for tooling around town.
You will be attending to the cheap disc every 20k miles, or less. Unless you have the "original factory disc" that came on the truck. Not China, not new Dodge. The "ones" that the truck was "delivered" with. The are good for about three cuts and 120k miles.
That's if you don't descend any long 5% grades towing 3k pounds and no trailer brakes. One long 7% grade with a 5000-pound trailer and no trailer brakes and the disc will be "completely" roasted, warp city. Unless you start at the top in first gear with a 3.91 rear gear.

This trailer has electric brakes independent of each other with three separate brake controllers "and" power supplies on all three axles that can be locked up at 60. They can stop the Dakota whether it wants to stop or not. It tows the motor grader at 55 just fine.
Without that trailer the Dakota couldn't even tow and stop another Dakota on a tow dolly.

P9300012.JPG
 
Holy way too small a truck for the job Batman!
:poke:
No, it's just fine. It's got a 132-inch wheelbase and 4.88 rear gear. Dodge rated the rear axle assembly for 3,900 pounds. It falls within all truck, axle, and tire gvw and gvwr ratings. No DOT or CDL needed.
It's worlds better than putting that motor grader on a bumper trailer of a one ton.

Dodge rated the truck to "pull" 8,000 pounds with 3.91 gear, which is of no concern to anybody other than the Dodge warranty department.
 
Back
Top