 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chevrolet / Chevrolet Trucks / July 2007Making the handbrake stronger, 2002 Tahoe
Hey Newsgroups, I recently bought a used 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe. When standing in a hill, the handbrake is not strong enough to keep the car stopped. I looked through the Internet for any plans on the handbrake but couldn't find any. Further, it seems as if there is a mechanism to block the brake at a certain point, so it cant be pulled to strong. Has anybody got plans or ideas how to correct the handbrake in order to make it stronger? thanks in advance Thorben Grosser >Hey Newsgroups, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >thanks in advance >Thorben Grosser most likely the "parking brake" has not been used very much and the rear brake shoes need to be adjusted. The parking brake only applies the rear brakes. I'm guessing that truck has drum brakes on the rear in place of discs. Either way the rear brakes need to be inspected and or adjusted. ----------- Elbert ask@me.com > Hey Newsgroups, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > thanks in advance > Thorben Grosser It is broken or out of adjustment then. The emergency brake or 'hand or foot brake' is supposed to be strong enough to use in an emergency to stop the vehicle, let alone hold it on a hill. It should even stall the engine when in the forward direction. None hold well in the reverse direction. I lost my brakes in a Chevy pickup at the top of a 10 mile hill once, the pedal hit the floor. My emergency brake and transmission worked to get me to the garage at the bottom of the hill no problem. I recently had a brake line blow out on my Jeep during an emergency stop and again my emergency brake worked well to stop me and get me the 2 blocks via back roads home. It has adjustments in the wheel itself and cable adjustments. If it tops or bottoms out, the wheel adjustment needs to be done first, then the cable should be set for the handle to grab someplace around 4 or 5 clicks up. Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile... Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2115147590 (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page) > The emergency brake or 'hand or foot brake' is supposed to be strong > enough to use in an emergency to stop the vehicle, let alone hold it on a > hill. It should even stall the engine when in the forward direction. Not with an automatic transmission.  Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >> The emergency brake or 'hand or foot brake' is supposed to be strong >> enough to use in an emergency to stop the vehicle, let alone hold it on a >> hill. It should even stall the engine when in the forward direction. > > Not with an automatic transmission. 'My' Chevy pickup was an automatic and the emergency brake 'sure' was strong enough to stop the vehicle!!!! It also 'sure' was strong enough to hold it on a hill! It was also 'sure' strong enough to bog out my carb 350 engine so I knew it was on, never tried to overpower it though.... Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile... Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2115147590 (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page) "Stopping the vehicle" is far different from "stalling the engine". SignatureSteve Barker >>> The emergency brake or 'hand or foot brake' is supposed to be strong >>> enough to use in an emergency to stop the vehicle, let alone hold it on [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2115147590 > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page) >"Stopping the vehicle" is far different from "stalling the engine". yes it is and if it has a lift and oversized tires it will provided increased leverage against the brakes and make it harder to hold too. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > 'My' Chevy pickup was an automatic and the emergency brake 'sure' was > strong enough to stop the vehicle!!!! Never suggested it wouldn't. > It also 'sure' was strong enough to hold it on a hill! It should be. > It was also 'sure' strong enough to bog out my carb 350 engine so I knew > it was on, never tried to overpower it though.... That's a lot different than saying it will stall the engine. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >> 'My' Chevy pickup was an automatic and the emergency brake 'sure' was >> strong enough to stop the vehicle!!!! [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > That's a lot different than saying it will stall the engine. True, but it will stall the engine on my standard shift Jeep. Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's - Gone to the rust pile... Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2115147590 (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page) >> That's a lot different than saying it will stall the engine. > > True, but it will stall the engine on my standard shift Jeep. I guess that brings this conversation full circle. My only point initially was that it would not stall the engine if equipped with an automatic. Easy to do with a standard - you don't even need to apply the emergency brake to stall the engine in a standard. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >>> That's a lot different than saying it will stall the engine. >>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to do with a standard - you don't even need to apply the emergency brake to > stall the engine in a standard. Ahhh, you should have only left that part in the snippage because it looked like you said an automatic's park brake wouldn't stop it or hold it on a hill either... Mike one exception, the vehicles with rear disk brakes, the parking brake works equally well forward or reverse. SignatureSteve Barker > None hold well in the reverse direction. > one exception, the vehicles with rear disk brakes, the parking brake works > equally well forward or reverse. If they hold at all. Early GM four wheel disc designs sucked, and often wouldnt hold well, unless they were functioning up to their maximum potential...That means that the adjusters on the rear wheel had to be working properly. A handbrake should hold a car under reasonable circumstances. If the OPs is not, then something is wrong (other than that you bought a GM.) >> one exception, the vehicles with rear disk brakes, the parking brake >> works equally well forward or reverse. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > is not, > then something is wrong (other than that you bought a GM.) How do you mean work Properly? You do know that they are Manually Adjusted don't you? I have a 03 Silverado with 4 wheel Disc. The Park brake isn't hard, it was never hard when it was NEW. Same thing on any of the other Chevy and GMC 4 wheel Disc Brake systems, which would be my guess why they went back to rear drum brakes once again. At least the main reason. They work OK, but they aren't going to stop you very fast. Usually because they don't hold all that great, people drive around with them ON and not noticing and then they wear right out and now they don't work at all. I've seen so many of them wiped out. Normally they should last for YEARS as your not using them to STOP your Vehicle, but to just hold it in place. I've seem them ground down so badly grinding medal over and over again and the peddle going right to the floor like there's nothing there. Even after replaced, and adjusted up to where it need to be, it's still not HARD and goes about to the floor, but you can feel it working and will hold on a hill, but you can hit the gas and MOVE still. I will say it has to be the worse Parking brake setup ever. I don't know if going back to drums was the thing to do instead of just fixing the problem. There are many cars out there with separate Parking brake shoes on 4 wheel disc setup's that work great. Then again, there's nothing wrong with drums for the rear. They last, they're easy enough to work on, they're enclosed when helps keep junk out, less likely to seize up, and better parking brake. There's really no need for rear disc's on a truck or SUV. >>> one exception, the vehicles with rear disk brakes, the parking brake >>> works equally well forward or reverse. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > seize up, and better parking brake. There's really no need for rear > disc's on a truck or SUV. The parking brake on my Impala never worked well from the factory, and eventually quit working altogether. I had it adjusted once and it's already going all the way to the floor again, so it will probably stop holding soon. I do use it every time I stop (having learned to drive on stickshifts and in a hilly area.) nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > I recently bought a used 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe. When standing in a > hill, the handbrake is not strong enough to keep the car stopped. I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Has anybody got plans or ideas how to correct the handbrake in order > to make it stronger? On this particular vehicle, the "park brake" (contrary to popular opinion, this is not considered an emergency brake, and if you attempt to use it as such, good luck) is the drum in hat style...ie: it's a one piece shoe that sits inside the hat of the rear rotor. Also contrary to popular opinion, there is "no" external adjustment on the cable. You will see a threaded end on the cable, but you will notice that the nut is threaded onto it as far as it will go. This is not where you make your adjustment. In that year.....the park brake shoes had a design problem that allowed them to stay cocked over to one side and basically wore the shoe material out, even if you were not using the park brake. The new shoes will come with a re-designed retaining clip that allows the shoe to "float" and center itself properly after it is released. Best bet....remove the rear rotors, check the lining of the park brake shoes. If worn....replace both park brake shoes, adjust them manually until you can just slip the rotor over them, and you will have a decent "park" brake. Ian >> to make it stronger? > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Ian 11 posts before someone answered the OP's question, nice job Ian Whitelightning "Whitelightning" <white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote in message news:cAgqi.5723 > 11 posts before someone answered the OP's question, nice job Ian > > Whitelightning As always, Ian is a best source. Havent seen him on the group recently. It was not clear if the OP had the ability or desire to do this work himself. GM in particular has had some really troublesome parking brake designs. The drum in hat type of brake was used long ago in some Corvettes, and then reborn when the ratcheting pad design of the 80-90's didnt get the job done, IIRC. > reborn when the ratcheting pad design of the 80-90's didnt get the job > done, > IIRC. The ratcheting design worked fine IF you could get customers to use the parking brake when they parked. Other wise the rear brakes got way out of adjustment and then the hydraulic pressure pushed the two piece caliper pistons apart and they leaked. Shame on GM for not realizing customers wouldn't read and head the manual. (lots of sarcasm in that last line) Whitelightning >> reborn when the ratcheting pad design of the 80-90's didnt get the job >> done, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Whitelightning That was certainly the key to keeping them working, but as you say, the customers -for the most part - didnt use the parking brake. When those rear brakes stopped contributing, the front brake discs soon warped or the pads were ablated away. It just wasnt a practical design from GM I lived in Colorado and had manual trans cars all the time. I put a line locker on them. These are sold for drag race staging but they make a great Hill Holder too. I don't know if they would be compatible with ABS. I followed the "use it every time you park" instructions after replacing rear calipers on a 92 Lumina, and it still failed. The rear brakes ended up dragging and grinding out a rotor. BTW, the "tech" that told me to set the parking brake every time brought my car up and parked it without using the brake. Roy >>> reborn when the ratcheting pad design of the 80-90's didnt get the job >>> done, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > rear brakes stopped contributing, the front brake discs soon warped or > the pads were ablated away. It just wasnt a practical design from GM >I followed the "use it every time you park" instructions after replacing >rear calipers on a 92 Lumina, and it still failed. The rear brakes ended >up dragging and grinding out a rotor. BTW, the "tech" that told me to set >the parking brake every time brought my car up and parked it without using >the brake. > Roy If they dragged and ate a rotor, I'll bet it was the outside pad that was wasted and not the inner pad, and that is an indicator the slides froze and wouldn't let the caliper move when the service brakes were released. Its one of the reasons I don't like rear disk brakes, Everything is exposed and for some reason the rear calipers get nailed with all the garbage off the road. But still the biggest issue with the design on your Lumina, and all GM rear disk of that era except the Corvette, was out of adjustment condition resulting in the two piece caliper being pulled apart by hydraulic pressure and then leaking, resulting in a parking brake that didn't hold, and a low spongy brake pedal. It was a great design in theroy, and if people really saw what the park mechansim in a automatic tranny was they would never not use the parking brake, and the out of adjustment aspect would never have come into play.. Most people dont even realize that the original automatic trannies didnt have park, just reverse, neutral, low and drive. Park was added because people would shut it off in drive, then start it and hit what ever was in front of them so park was added, and then sometime after that the nuetral safety switch was added as well. when park was added, parking brake useage took a nose dive. We be a lazy animal. It shouild be noted that the Ford design of the same error was a resound flop as well with its own issues. Fixed mount calipers require a seprate parking brake mechanism, and because they are fixed mount, dont have slides to fail or freeze. But then again Mercedes and Volvo loved fixed calipers back then and you could hear them 5 miles away when they hit the brakes. Fixed mount calipers have major issues with harmonics, which is why Mercedes gives a discard thickness, and recommends rotor replacement rather than machining. Whitelightning As usual Ian, on the money, just did this to my Trailblazer. >> I recently bought a used 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe. When standing in a >> hill, the handbrake is not strong enough to keep the car stopped. I [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Ian > Hey Newsgroups, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > thanks in advance > Thorben Grosser For now carry a brick and block a tire:) Will keep you out of trouble until you figure out how to fix it. Al |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.