40+ year-old cars no longer need a MOT

But chassis in general. I can't remember the last time I saw a rusty sill.

I know at least one model of Jag that used the inside of the disc as a drum. Pads for the footbrake, shoes for the handbrake.

I recall one MOT tester grumpily pointing out that the handbrake was a

Since you are such an expert, I'd have thought you'd have exact numbers as a percentage of pre 1976 cars. In the contest of this discussion. Or even as a percentage of red herrings.

But I'll make an educated guess. Most of the cars left with only two wheel brakes that are still taxed and insured for road use will only be seen at shows. And very likely trailered there.

There are two main ways to improve steel life in cars. Galvanising and or filling cavities with wax.

And of course trying to design such areas not to be a water trap.

Yes - that design is pretty common now. Although may be restricted to cars with large enough rear discs to have room for the drum. So perhaps not so common on smaller cars.

My last BMW - an E39 - had that handbrake system. It was truly pathetic when I got the car at 3 years old. With a new first MOT from the dealer. But being an auto, not really ever needed.

Next MOT it failed on the hendbrake. So decided to investigate myself. One adjuster on the drum firmly jammed on zero - and the cables adjusted to try and compensate. So much for main dealer servicing.

Removed the adjuster and freed it in the vice. Then set up the brake by the book. Still not brilliant, but more than adequate as a parking brake.

Apparently in an emergency you stamped on the reverse pedal.

I think that there was a car where the braking was done by making the mudguards press against the outside of the tyres.

according to Toyota at Burnaston, the biggest cause of rust on car bodies was grease from bare hands on the untreated steel.

Think my defender (2000) had a drum brake on the propshaft too

Some Alfas had inboard disc brakes ... not sure if they bought anything to the party (other than needing a lift or pit to service ...)

Reduces the unsprung weight.

Citroens (eg my dad's old GS) also have/had inboard disc brakes. I'm not sure what advantage they had to outweigh the more difficult maintenance.

XJS had those IIRC - up against the diff they were

lower unsprung weight

True, but at the expense of much greater labour bills for replacing discs (have to dismantle drive shafts) and probably a bit more for replacing pads because they are less accessible.

I suppose it depends whether the manufacturer decides that more costly brake repairs will dissuade people from buying the car, and balance that against simpler suspension with lower unsprung weight.

How much does a disc brake weigh as opposed to a simple hub without disc, bake and callipers attached, given that presumably the biggest unsprung weight is the wheel.

Yes, for discs.

More accessible actually with no wheels in the way

If you had a hoist

maybe 25% less.

agaisnt a wheee and a tyre, and then there is the suspension wishbones of course

Let's just say that F1 cars use outboard brakes...

Which has a brake drum on the output shaft of the gearbox. Had one myself years ago, Never apply it when in motion. (The differential)

and not designing gutter draininge to be routed _inside_ the cills. I'm pretty sure mfrs don't want them lasting.

NT

news to me. But keep making stuff up.

you think strange things then

Well, on that point you are wrong.

NT

Briggs & Stratton Flyer, aka Smith Flyer. Spoon brakes were common on very early vehicles - the flyer was a later throwback, but primarily it was an exercise in how could one make the cheapest possible car.

NT