By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95


By eric95

I still need to get the brake lines working has anyone done this b4. The 4th gen rear has two lines and the third gen chassie only has one line coming from it. How would you guys go about doing this. Thanks

 

Mind if jump in this post also. There are a lot of facts posted about this and i have looked at the diagrams on autozone. I seem to be missing some parts to hook up the e-brake cables. I read to get the cables for a 92 with disk brakes? what else am i missing?

 

looks good, I'm doing the same swap right now, what ratio did you go with? How does the car feel now after the swap?

 

got 3.42s in it ive only backed it off the lift and put it in a parking space cause i have no brakes yet but feels good so far

 

does anyone know whai should do about the brakes??

 

im not sure about the brakes, i'm contemplating doing this swap in my daily. do you need a special U-joint for the driveshaft or will the stock one work?

 

it was a simple process. All you have to do is unbolt the torque arm, shocks, sway bar, driveshaft, and lower control arms and then bolt the new one in and put the drive shaft right back in. there is no specil u joint or anything. the whole thing took about 3 hours and i had no problems.

 

The only issues in the swap are getting the e-brake cables to work (I think ebmiller88 has something in the works) and the speedo to read correctly if you've changed ratios, of course.

JamesC

 

but the problem im having is with the brake lines. I can go without an e brake for a while but i still need to hook the regular brakes up. unlike the thirdgen rear that is one line going to both rear drums, the 4th gen rear has a seperate line for each brake. so the line from the MC cant bolt up to both the lines in the rear. Im sure i can do some fabrications to get it to work but i was wondering if anyone knew a good way to go about this.

 

Humm, I'm not entirely sure I understand. There should be one line to the rear of your car, which a T splits on the top side of the rear end. The T feeds both L/R brakes. Maybe my single-cell brain is misfunctioning (happens a lot these days!)

JamesC

 

yeah what u got rigged up there is what i need to do. Do you remember what hardware you used to do that.

 

thats just a stock T-block, all 3rd gens are like that. When 4th gens starting using traction control they had 4 channel brake lines, and w/o traction cont. they used the same T-block. You shouild be able to get it from NAPA.

It looks like from the pics you used a rear from a 93-97 rear, if that is correct you can use e-brake cables from a 92.

also there is a thread called "thinking 4th gen rear swap" that is very informative.

 

k thanks for the info and the rear is out of a 99

 

I assumed that's what it was because of the LS1 brakes. If you're looking to upgrade the brakes lines with braided, this would be a good occasion. The block is included.

JamesC

 

Swap looks good nice brake conversion. I didnt know the 99's had drums i kinda thought they all started going disc. But nice disc swap. you can use cables from 89-92 if you want to use your factory cable spilt above the tranny. And 93-02 you will just have to take the cables and splitter or make an extreme adjust. Meaning adjust all the way back.
But the pre 89 were old steel calipers so they wont work. I had mine, whole disc setup for sale but it didnt sell. So i installed it.
Part Number 10164125. Left and rights cables are the same if you decide to keep the split. Not sure of the numbers for the newer cars.
Oh and the 15"s dont do your swap any justice you need to get some 16"s if you think about it. And i hope the front 1LE swap is next

 

My rear is out of a 99 also, and I used the e-brake cables from it and they work fine. I jsut had to get some cable clamps and adjust the length of the passenger side one.

 

i thought you had to upgrade your master cylinder to a larger bore to get more pressure to the rear because --FACT--
----------
i thought you had to upgrade your master cylinder to a larger bore to get more pressure to the rear because --FACT-- disc breaks require a
----------
i thought you had to upgrade your master cylinder to a larger bore diameter to get more pressure to the rear because --FACT-- disc breaks require a lot more pressure than drums... or maybe its not pressure, maybe its volume anyway--- i have always heard on a rear drum to disc... replace your master cylinder!

 

I have heard differently I heard the rear drum M/C was better but just need the proportion valve for the rear. In fact the drums require more. They need a total of 10lbs and the discs actually needs at least 2lbs I would get an adjustable prop valve to keep from getting the nose dive. IT SUCKS

 

I took the brake lines off of the third gen rear and bolted them up to the 4th gen rear and then installed the proportion valve. the 4th gen rears with traction control have two different lines on each brake so i just took the third gen hard line and bolted it on the 4th gen rear. It seems to work fine i just had to add some bends to the lines because they were to long ill post some pictures of then line and the line swap i did in about 2 days.

 

If you have the drum master, you have the correct one. The pro valve is swapped for another. A search will provide a part number.

JamesC

 

yeah the master cylinder from a drum car will work on a disk car. However the MC in my car is 21 years old and maybe it is a good idea to change it anyways.

 

what are the advantages of going to a 4th gen rear?

 

Disc brakes if you don't currently have them. Larger rotors if you have an 82-88. No real advantage if you're running 89-92 disc brakes.

JamesC

 

^ posi, disk brakes, better carrier, and depending on what car you get the rear out of you get higher gears

 

How much wider is the fourth gen over the drum brake third gen? This is interesting. Is the required proportioning valve hard to come by, expensive?

 

Not to be a @ss H@le but I dont like the way it looks from the back. It just needs wider tires or bigger rims. Tire just looks thin. From front or side I love it.

Then again I don't understand why people do the 4gen rear swap. As for offset With a stock rear and rim you can fit a 10" tire but without a different rim and a 4gen rear you have it closer to the lip. Do like the Disc.

 

How's that?

JamesC

 

I believe that the LS1 cars rears had Auburn units from 98-00 and Zexel units for the 00-02.

Also I noticed better stopping power between my 89 PBR set up and my current LS1 brakes.

 

well mcgarnicle pretty much covered it

i mean what he posted is exactly what i had read here on this site about the auburn and zexel unit being better then the one that came in the thirdgen. I haven't personally experienced this just what i've read here

 

with stock tires its not that cool looking but once u upgrade to a bigger rim and wider tires it really starts to give it a mean look. I did it for the posi gears and the discs. For about 400 dollars i got a posi unit, better gears, and better brakes. Just think hom much money and work you would have to spend and do to achieve all that out of a 3rd gen rear.

 

will the fourth gen rear hold up to 600hp? If not how much mods would you have to do to get it up to par?

 

Not even close! The 4th gen rear is the same piece of junk 10 bolt that the thirdgens got. The reason these are so readily available and cheap is because all the 4th gen guys who make any power are installing 9" rears. The only benefit to these is that you can get a posi rear with good brakes pretty cheaply. It also saves the need for spacers if you run 4th gen wheels. If you've got a stock thirdgen, the rear will hold up nicely, but once you get above the 300RWHP range, you start getting into risky territory.

There is nothing you can do that will make these things handle 600hp except replace them.

 

thats what I figured but I see in here all the time people want 4th gen rears.....jusy wondering why.

 

Because a 3rd gen rear is pushing 20+ years, and a 4th gen rear is about $200.

 

yeah it all comes down to them being cheap, better then the 3rd gen rear, has posi, better brakes, better gears, easy to install, u can run 4th gen rims and tires, and easy to find. The forth gen rears will only brake in cars with around 350 hp if you are able to get traction. IN a street can you should be fine with up to 400 hp its when u put slicks on your car and get traction is when you risk brakeing your rear.

 

About two inches to the outside.



That is the point of using it. If you can get a 10" tire on a 3rd Gen rearend, you can get a much wider one on a 4th Gen rearend as it sticks out two inches further while the suspension and the wheel well stay in the 3rd Gen location. You can see from the pictures a pretty wide rim can go on the 3rd Gen easily if it kept the factory offset. It's cheaper and easier than reworking the wheel wells and you get some additional benefits.

It was also said the carriers are stronger and they are. The weak link is still the fact that it is a 7.5/7.625 rearend though. My 97 Z28 did take quite a few 5000 RPM launches though on slicks and many races after that on my drag radials before it went KABOOM. It only dead hooked on the slicks though. Drag radials = heavy clutch slip and wheel spin. If you spin it will live for a while. If you dead hook it can snap right away.

 

were u getting traction at those 5000rpm launches or not? When u put the slicks on ur car how much hp were u making?

 

Yea, it was biting very hard. The car from the factory had a lot of squat and lurch action going on which made it pretty fast on a launch and on the shifts. With the slicks on, it squated harder than it ever had and the wheel wells dug into the slicks. I'm not saying it lifted the tires but there was massive change in what I was seeing through the windshield.

The car was more about its torque than the power. It was only putting down about 282 hp to the wheels but, 330 ft-lbs. It pulled 300 ft-lbs+ from 2000-5000 RPM. Why launch at 5000 you ask? Because it would bog anywhere else on the slicks. IIRC, once the car went forward on the launch, the RPM were falling down to about 2800 or so. That's why a lower launch was bogging the car down. The bog was bad enough to where it felt like you had the TCS engaged.

Keep in mind this wasn't on the track. It was a test n' tune to see what effect slicks would have on the car since it was having issues on drag radials.