In 1963, the story goes, Studebaker was the first American automaker to offer disc brakes on a production car. Or was it? Mac’s Motor City Garage takes a brief look back at an important safety innovation.
In matters of automotive history, claims of first can be rather like peeling an onion. First, you have to carefully define what you mean by first. We note that in this original commercial spot from 1963, Studebaker doesn’t actually claim to be the first American carmaker to offer disc brakes. That’s safe ground, for in fact, both the 1950 Chrysler Imperial and the 1949-50 Crosley, to name two, offered discs well before Studebaker.
However, the Imperial’s Ausco Lambert system was not a disc brake as we know it. This setup employed a pair of concentric friction rings or discs. Meanwhile, the Goodyear-Hawley aircraft-type spot brakes used by Crosley proved to be not ready for prime time, seizing up solid at the first sight of road salt. The company ditched the system barely a year later for conventional hydraulic drum brakes.
Studebaker Bendix disc brake system, 1963
To give the South Bend automaker its due, we could say that Studebaker was the first American manufacturer to offer a practical disc brake setup, beating the Motor City’s big three to the punch by nearly two years. But even that claim is highly conditional. After all, Jaguar in Britain was offering four-wheel Dunlop discs on the XK150 production sports car in 1957, after introducing them to great effect on the XKC LeMans racers back in 1953.
Manufactured by Bendix, also based in South Bend, the Studebaker discs were rather primitive by contemporary standards, with unvented rotors and fixed two-piston calipers. Studebaker’s hot new sports car for ’63, the Avanti, was sold with front disc brakes as standard equipment, while they were an extra-cost, $90 option on the rest of the company’s lineup. In this demonstration, a Lark with Bendix discs is tested against a Ford Falcon with conventional drum brakes, and the advantage is clear—especially once the drum brakes become wet (take a note, youngsters). Video below.
While disc brakes are clearly superior to drum, that video was a load of BS ( like most promotional videos ) Wet disc brakes still take a while to dry and by design, are still prone to seizing. The trucking industry is just now starting to offer disc brakes on class 8 trucks. Probably the single most important innovation in years for trucks. Their ease of service and anti-fade qualities, and reduced stopping distance far surpass the drum brakes( anybody that’s driven semi’s knows all about brake fade) Airline’s too, have used disc brakes for years. Fun video, btw, did anybody else notice the bad color match on the Lark’s left front fender? Thanks, MCG
I have several cars (Crosley, Studebaker, Excalibur) with “primitive” disc brakes. I can say that they are vastly superior across the board than concurrent drum brakes. About the only exception would be the outstanding drum brakes on the Porsche 356.
The earliest motorcycle disc brake that I’ve found was 1906, but I have some undated drawings of tricycles in the 1890s that had them.
https://occhiolungo.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/the-first-disc-brake-part-3/
Any bicycle with calliper brakes has disc brakes. With say a 27″ rotor! [the wheel rim] Euro and pommy cars had discbrakes several years before.
The period disc brake is not as good as made out to be. Test; my 64 Holden with huge 9″ drums would outstop a 66 Holden with 10″ discs in about 1970. After about 3 stops from 70mph the disc was about the same, though it was getting hot and shuddery! The 64 after a few miles recovered to normalcy.
Disc brakes have the advantage of getting rid of far more heat quicker BUT require far more line pressure to work, and far more volume of brake fluid as well. So are far more effected by pad wear [taper] plus axles moving in and out on the rear where unless you have proper floating hubs the pad knockoff is more pronounced.
Modern cars are fairly good ofcourse but the pedal gets spongey fairly quickly as the pads taper, far worse with multiple piston callipers. The reason many callipers are made with 1/8 of an inch staggered pistons so the pads taper less.
Ofcourse with asbestos free material you just about bin a pair of rotors everytime you change the pads, especially with good hi torque pads. Meanwhile my 155000 mile Galaxie still has the original 45 y/o unmachined rotors with 80s asbestos pads that have done at least 40000 mike and are still good for at least 10000 mile more. And that car is at times driven spiritedly, tows car trailers etc.