Check front calipers for proper operation.  As I said the fronts do most of
the work.  The rear is more about pedal feel.

Ken

Ken Wilford at vanagain.com

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:43 PM pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Ken!
>
> My symptom is that when I slam on the brakes, the van just doesn't stop
> very quickly.  The van doesn't pull, there is no noise, etc., but it takes
> too long to stop.  In particular, I am unable to get the tires to lock.
> Should I still be looking at the rear brakes then, even if they are a
> relatively small part of the stopping equation?
>
> Thanks as always for advice!
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:25 PM, kenneth wilford (Van-Again) <
> kenwilfy@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Back breaks do very little on the van.  Mainly for parking break.  Does
> > maybe 20 percent of stopping.  So why put rear discs where they will do
> the
> > least good?  The front if anywhere is where you would want more stopping
> > power.
> >
> > However, unless you are traveling in the mountains with a fully loaded
> van
> > and an engine conversion, the stock brakes should be fine provided they
> are
> > in good condition and the rear shoes are installed and adjusted properly.
> > Most of the time poor pedal feel is actually due to improperly installed
> or
> > adjusted rear brake shoes.  I know that sounds counter intuitive but that
> > has been my experience with these vans.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 10:12 PM pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Pickle's stopping power has long been on my list of things to address.
> >>
> >> We have 16" CLK wheels so a bigger brake kit seems like a natural idea.
> >> But are late model front spindles in good condition readily obtainable?
> >>
> >> Basically here is what I'm considering:
> >> 1) Overhaul the rear brakes, hope for an improvement there
> >> 2) Rear disc brakes (i.e., the smallcar or burley kits)
> >> 3) somehow get some late model spindles and do the big brakes up front,
> in
> >> addition to either 1) or 2).
> >>
> >> Maybe I am being naive, but coming from an 83.5, #2 seems like it may
> have
> >> a better ratio of effectiveness to hastle than #3.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >> -Wes
> >>
> >
>