I have a 1966 Mustang Convertible... totally original 4sp manual. Still has the original drum brakes.

I recently went through a red-light camera intersection and failed to stop because I thought I had time and though they're reasonably well-balanced for drums, really slamming on the brakes isn't the most controlled action. Plus I wasn't even sure I could have stopped in time. Now I'm headed to court to try to explain that proceeding through the intersection seemed the most prudent action and I shouldn't be fined $389 and sent to traffic school.

My question is -- does anyone know the published braking distance specs for classic mustangs with drums? Or for bonus points, could I have stopped safely with a 3.8s yellow in a 40mph zone?

Brad

 

Front drums kind of suck...and you didn't say how fast you were going, redlight runner (and probably speeder too). How brakes performed when new 40 years ago have no reality in this situation. Please drive safely by not running reds and get some front disks while your at it. Your first post should not ask for help in court, just not cool.
Good luck though.

 

If you were going 40 on dry road with a ~4.0 sec yellow that’s a 10 mph decrease per second every second.

at 2800 lbs that’s ummmmmmm like 240ish horse power worth of braking required to stop I believe that stock drums in working order would give closer to 300+hp braking power so yeah you could have stopped in time.

Either way the drums totally suck, you should shell out the 1,000 bucks for some SSBC stuff with semi metallic pads and slotted rotors even with drums in the back your going to push 500-600hp+ worth or braking power

Gun

 

well its sucks that u got fined, but 69mach1377 is right you shouldnt be asking us how help you in court they'll just ask have you have brakes and if they work and thats final, they wont care if its drums or not. go with disc brakes believe me u'll stop better and also getting a vacuum booster while ur at it, this helps you more to stop.

Now if your doing performance on your engine i really suggest in getting disc brakes;
more horses=more braking performance needed.

 

Oh well, I should have expected the editorializing on my backstory. Not an easy forum to prove I'm a solid law-abiding defensive driver who felt it prudent to continue through than slam the brakes.

Thanks to Gun for his answer. My question still remains if there are published braking distances for at 65 or 66 Mustang with drums?

Brad

PS - I plan to get discs. The calculations show stopping in 3s from 40mph requires .6g of force, which suggests I better get that shoulder belt too. :-)

 

If the camera didn't get a shot of your face, you can contest it (say someone borrowed your car)
On dry pavement, your tires will hold slightly less than 9.8 m/s2 of deceleration

Was the green light unusually short? That's another excuse

Are you in california? http://www.redlightcameraticket.com/

I had drums on my '67 six cyl... boy they got fun in the rain especially after going through puddles.

 

woah

9.8 m/s2 of deceleration thats an odd measurement (maybe) I think i get it now thats 32 feet of braking power per second? Nevermind its still weird lol

So if the car was traveling 64 feet per second that means it would take 2 seconds to stop?

umm dang thats kind of wicked lets see 60mph=1 mile per minute thats 5280 feet in 60 sec then uhhh 5280/60=88 fps

so 60mph=88fps so then 88 feet is 29.3 yards which is 31.6 meters /9.8 thats 3.2 seconds to stop from 60mph

Dang that cant be right not with drums all the way around thats like 700hp worth of stopping power

what did i miss?

Gun

 

This is all kind of pointless ... and someone won't even admit just how fast he was really going before punching thru the red.

"Or for bonus points, could I have stopped safely with a 3.8s yellow in a 40mph zone?"

The Editor...

 

well this WHOLE thing is pointless because we all die someday then what does it matter.

Im having fun with it, can anyone explain the 9.8 m/s2 of deceleration thing for me I gave it a shot but it didn’t come out right

Gun

 

I wasn't speeding, I was going 40 or a little less. This is a pristine vehicle in original condition, so I don't drive it hard (which is also why I was reticent to slam the brakes.)

The 9.8m/s^2 was the holding power of the wheels to the road if you have good tires. So I believe the poster was saying unless you're decelerating at more than 9.8m/s^2 (32ft/sec^2) your tires shouldn't skid. Decelerating from 40-0mph in 3s is about 19ft/s^2 or 5.9m/s^2 or .6g. 19ft/s^2 is quite a lot of force.

Brad