69 Barracuda Formula S with front stock discs, A199-1 SSBC calipers upgrade disappointment

[LIONEL]

Hi, we made brake upgrade on a 69 Cuda Formula S (a friend of mine) with stock front factory discs (he didn't want to upgrade to 4.5'' bolt pattern and with 4'')
the breaking was poor in spite of new front discs and rebuild calipers

We decided to install A199-1 SSBC calipers and semi metallic pads, that fits with the factory discs
the rear brakes was modified with DBK 384 disc kit
New power assist and master cylinder from MP Brakes
The VL3359K valving for a 4 wheel disc system installed

After installation and bleeding, we are a little disappointed with the braking !
the rear is OK
But the car doesn't brake enough in front wheels, we measured about 60 Bars pressure in front

Has anyone already installed these SSBC calipers with factory discs ? what result ?
It may be a ''friction'' problem between discs and pads ? disc surface too hard ? or inappropriate pads

Thanks for your reviews
lionel

 

[rmchrgr]

Yes, I had the same experience with them. In English we would say "they suck".

Even with a small 7/8" bore master cylinder they produced no stopping power at all. It has nothing to do with the pads or bleeding them properly. The problem is that the pistons are too small and do not provide enough clamping force. The pistons in these calipers are actually smaller than the factory Kelsey Hayes 4-piston calipers which were not that great to begin with.

I even drag raced my car with these a few times and it was an adventure trying to stop the car. I was only going 12.0 @ 111 mph in the 1/4 mile and I always had to use the last turn off. There were a few instances where I had two feet on the pedal trying to get the thing slowed down. They also wouldn't hold the car against the converter at the line so I could only launch the car from just above idle. Normal driving on the street was marginally better.

I got rid of the whole system several years ago and replaced them with Wilwoods. I would never recommend this particular SSBC system to anyone. It's a nice idea but the performance is not there. SSBC should re-design the calipers to accommodate larger pistons or just discontinue them.

 

[LIONEL]

Thanks for your reply !
I don't quite understand how a famous brand like SSBC was able to design and sell a poor equipment like the A-199 calipers
we waste money and time for disappointing result
we see more clearly now and looking for another solution

 

[AJ/FormS]

Yes I have heard that, here of FABO, a few times
Since you are in France<
You might try the biggest M/C in your parts bag, and then re-engineer your Pedal-ratio. Looking at those calipers, I would suspect the calipers are flexing due to insufficient mass.
BTW
I have a factory KH 4-piston kit on my 68 Barracuda with a 7/8 M/C and on the street it's never let me down. But on the back I have a 10 x 2 drum kit running unproportioned with 295/50-15 BFG T/As. That rear system pulls down hard.

 

[Inertia]

Spitballing here, ,
Curious if anyone tried a different pad material ?
That can make a huge difference, and break-in .
Depending on composite, break-in procedure can be very important, - you glaze those puppies, they won't hold nuthin.

 

[harrisonm]

I thought SSBC went out of business many years ago.

 

[RustyRatRod]

I thought SSBC went out of business many years ago.

Web site seems up and current.
SSBC-USA | American Stopping Power

 

[TheGrateRonzini]

All I know is that I drove out to their shop in Clarence, NY. Tried getting a kit for 71 valiant. They wanted more money at the brick and mortar store (cash too!) than Summit for the same kit. And 6month wait. We went with bbp 73+

 

[rmchrgr]

Spitballing here, ,
Curious if anyone tried a different pad material ?
That can make a huge difference, and break-in .
Depending on composite, break-in procedure can be very important, - you glaze those puppies, they won't hold nuthin.

Honestly, I don't think a "better" pad compound would overcome the fact that the caliper pistons are too small. I had the smallest bore master cylinder I could get (7/8") and it still wouldn't generate enough force over the given area of the pistons. In regards to break in, I made sure that I bedded the pads in correctly so there was definitely no glazing.

On top of the pistons being small, the rotors are also only 10.87" in diameter. If you combine those two less-than-ideal design parameters, the sum of the parts will not be sufficient for good braking. About the only application where I could see these brakes (factory K.H. type, NOT SSBC aluminum copies) being OK is on the early A cars because they are slightly smaller and lighter cars than the later models.

As we all know, Chrysler was notoriously cheap and it probably would have been cost prohibitive for them to re-design their A body brakes three years into the run. Would they have had to change the bolt pattern to 5 x 4 1/2" and/or go to 15" wheels to fit better brakes? Possibly? Were they going to do that if it cost them profit? Nope. They eventually did it in 1973 so they knew there was a need.

Bottom line though, SSBC did not do a great job engineering their product. I get that they were trying to satisfy a niche market and again, the idea was on the right track but the end product was not very good. It's hard to make an already marginal braking system better when you reduce the size of the caliper pistons!

The calipers are only one part of the system though. For those that don't know, to use these SSBC pieces, you'd either want to have a car already equipped with the early Kelsey Hayes cast iron disc system where they would be a straight swap or you would have to piece it all together to make it work - spindles, hubs, bearings, ball joints, correct bolts etc. Finding '65-'72 disc brake parts in good, usable condition is no small feat in 2023 either, especially the specific disc brake hubs. Most of it is worn out junk now anyway.

I regrettably went that way when I changed my Duster to discs however many years ago because it was lighter than the later '73 -up caliper conversion. Additionally, the early brakes don't offset the wheels outwards like the '73-up disc conversion does - I can't stand that. I even went so far as to source the impossible-to-find correct length, shouldered caliper to spindle bolts from a place in Australia. It cost more to ship them up here than the bolts themselves.

It was all a waste in the end because the brakes sucked.

 

[Inertia]

Honestly, I don't think a "better" pad compound would overcome the fact that the caliper pistons are too small. I had the smallest bore master cylinder I could get (7/8") and it still wouldn't generate enough force over the given area of the pistons. In regards to break in, I made sure that I bedded the pads in correctly so there was definitely no glazing.

On top of the pistons being small, the rotors are also only 10.87" in diameter. If you combine those two less-than-ideal design parameters, the sum of the parts will not be sufficient for good braking. About the only application where I could see these brakes (factory K.H. type, NOT SSBC aluminum copies) being OK is on the early A cars because they are slightly smaller and lighter cars than the later models.

As we all know, Chrysler was notoriously cheap and it probably would have been cost prohibitive for them to re-design their A body brakes three years into the run. Would they have had to change the bolt pattern to 5 x 4 1/2" and/or go to 15" wheels to fit better brakes? Possibly? Were they going to do that if it cost them profit? Nope. They eventually did it in 1973 so they knew there was a need.

Bottom line though, SSBC did not do a great job engineering their product. I get that they were trying to satisfy a niche market and again, the idea was on the right track but the end product was not very good. It's hard to make an already marginal braking system better when you reduce the size of the caliper pistons!

The calipers are only one part of the system though. For those that don't know, to use these SSBC pieces, you'd either want to have a car already equipped with the early Kelsey Hayes cast iron disc system where they would be a straight swap or you would have to piece it all together to make it work - spindles, hubs, bearings, ball joints, correct bolts etc. Finding '65-'72 disc brake parts in good, usable condition is no small feat in 2023 either, especially the specific disc brake hubs. Most of it is worn out junk now anyway.

I regrettably went that way when I changed my Duster to discs however many years ago because it was lighter than the later '73 -up caliper conversion. Additionally, the early brakes don't offset the wheels outwards like the '73-up disc conversion does - I can't stand that. I even went so far as to source the impossible-to-find correct length, shouldered caliper to spindle bolts from a place in Australia. It cost more to ship them up here than the bolts themselves.

It was all a waste in the end because the brakes sucked.

I didn't want to open this can of worms, you have great points, this kinda demonstrates theory vs actuality.
In fact the Kelsey Hayes ( unless there are some I haven't seen) have a 1 5/8ish inch piston vs the SSBC set you posted shows to be 1 3/4ish, actually bigger, and times 8 pistons is substantial.
The 7/8 master is smaller than Stock for the Kelsey Hayes, giving increased line pressure.
If the pads are in the same plane of the disc with both calipers, theoretically they should have tremendously more clamping force, but in actuality, they don't appear to work as expected.

The only variable is friction materials.

Unless you have taken a number of different sets of pads/composites to the track, and done a series of tests to actually compare different composites as I have, you can't have a valid actual opinion.

Friction compounds and break-in do make a vast difference.

 

[rmchrgr]

I distinctly remember measuring the piston diameter with a caliper and from what I recall, the SSBC caliper pistons were in fact smaller than the factory iron ones. It wasn't a lot but it was something. I guess I could be wrong, this was all 10-11 years ago and I don't have notes to refer to but I'm pretty certain of it.

In my case, the 7/8" bore master cylinder should have created more than enough hydraulic pressure to make the brakes work but for whatever reason, it didn't. I actually changed to the 7/8" from the 15/16" one I had on there originally and there was no change in performance or pedal feel. I was surprised, I was sure the smaller bore master would have done the trick. Rear drums were all new, were adjusted properly and had 7/8" rear wheel cylinders. The car should have stopped on a dime and given change by merely thinking about applying the brakes. Not so much.

The pads are what come with the calipers. You'd think (or at least hope) SSBC would have enough insight into the dynamics of their own system to choose the correct compound for sufficient all-around performance. Again, I bedded the pads in correctly. I learned how to do it at Chrysler dealer tech training school and had done it countless times beforehand and never had a come back from glazed rotors. I wasn't road racing the car so it's not like I was pushing the parts to the limit. The system just did not work well, period.

I even researched pedal ratios to make sure what I had was right vs. OE front drums and all that but none of it mattered. In the end, it was not worth my time and effort to figure out why they didn't perform well so I gave up on them and moved on.

 

[Inertia]

I distinctly remember measuring the piston diameter with a caliper and from what I recall, the SSBC caliper pistons were in fact smaller than the factory iron ones. It wasn't a lot but it was something. I guess I could be wrong, this was all 10-11 years ago and I don't have notes to refer to but I'm pretty certain of it.

In my case, the 7/8" bore master cylinder should have created more than enough hydraulic pressure to make the brakes work but for whatever reason, it didn't. I actually changed to the 7/8" from the 15/16" one I had on there originally and there was no change in performance or pedal feel. I was surprised, I was sure the smaller bore master would have done the trick. Rear drums were all new, were adjusted properly and had 7/8" rear wheel cylinders. The car should have stopped on a dime and given change by merely thinking about applying the brakes. Not so much.

The pads are what come with the calipers. You'd think (or at least hope) SSBC would have enough insight into the dynamics of their own system to choose the correct compound for sufficient all-around performance. Again, I bedded the pads in correctly. I learned how to do it at Chrysler dealer tech training school and had done it countless times beforehand and never had a come back from glazed rotors. I wasn't road racing the car so it's not like I was pushing the parts to the limit. The system just did not work well, period.

I even researched pedal ratios to make sure what I had was right vs. OE front drums and all that but none of it mattered. In the end, it was not worth my time and effort to figure out why they didn't perform well so I gave up on them and moved on.

I agree cuz they shoulda worked pretty good from the git-go. .lol
I've had a ton of theories fail, on the way to finding out what really works, lol
I do wish you had tried different pads tho, ceramic types could be a problem.
Cheers .

 

[LIONEL]

Hi all

First, thank you again for your reply and interest for the braking problem
we now understand better the problem of "undersized" SSBC calipers and that we never had good braking with that
As I said, my friend with his 69 Cuda took this way with SSBC calipers, because it was "bolt on" for his stock spindles and his 4" bolt pattern wheels
We spent time and money for nothing and see for another solution for a kit with single floating piston
Mancini, where we bought the calipers, could have say that is not a good solution and purposed other equipment

we looking for that kind of kit







For me and my experience with 67-69 Barracuda :
It's my third Barracuda, I have had one 68 340 CI fastback and one 68 340 CI convertible
i had "scares" with the brakes at this time : insufficient considering the 340CI performance, I always kept my distance with the others cars, for not to have to make emergency braking
The problems, I had when I didn't use the car for a long period, the KH piston calipers "rusted" and blocked and no sufficient braking
At this time stock with rear 9" drums and front discs with KH calipers, and i didn't make some modifications
In Europe all the cars imported by Simca Chrysler had front discs brakes and front sway bars

Twenty years ago, I've restored the coupé 67 and put a 340CI (my favorite engine) good compromise for A Body
i swore to myself to modified the brake system and the bolt pattern for 4.5" for larger choice of equipment
I put 10"x 2.5 rear drums with special rear axle and third generation single 70 mm floating piston
Honestly, result was better (it was not a competition braking) for cruising and street use, it's correct
I just had some problems with the drum end play shoes corrector, and sometimes one wheel brakes more than the other
For many years, I decided to install rear disc brakes, that I do with MDRC01 RS kit
For the front disc, I bought a rebuilding kit for 70 mm caliper after 20 years and control all the brake system
i shortly have finish but I had a problem with a damaged bracket caliper thread
it's in process to solve that
I took advantage that car was on jack to install bigger Addco front sway bar, 4 new shock absorbers and replace two damaged ball joint
Soon my 67 on his wheels and on the road

Best regards
lionel