\ W
There it little difference mechanically between two
wheel brake and four-wheel brake mechanisms.
Front-wheel brakes are merely added capacity, of
conventional design. All four brakes are operated by
the foot pedal.
The emergency brakes on rear wheels or transmis
sion, operated by the hand leoer% are retained in all
four-wheel brake systems.
Controversy already exists between four-wheel
brake advocates as to the relative merit of external or
internal types of brake pressure on front wheels.
The duplication of parts, added weight, and increased
friction of four-wheel brakes are common knowledge.
If four-wheel brakes were necessary, safe, and simple
in operation, their existence would be justified, even
with these impedimenta.
The factory makes proper adjustment of clearances
between brake linings and drums.
After the factory ships the car, its responsibility
ceases for brake adjustments, and the responsibility
is shifted to the owner.
Electric starters, battery ignition, and vacuum
tanks are acknowledged developments in the evolu
tion of the automobile. They are built complete,
encased in housings by thq factory, are practically
• automatic and require few adjustments. Four-wheel
brakes are in an entirely different category <
Numerous dealers and factory branch salesmen
selling four-wheel brake cars, are already advising
buyers that the front brakes may be disconnected, if
they are not wanted. This would mean, of course,
that the extra weight and impedimenta would be car
ried around uselessly.
Other front-wheel brake* are adjuster ror aucn
weak pressure that they cannot lock the front wheels,
and the brakes are thus merely camouflage.
Four-wheel brakes will cause more trouble and
accidents in a month than they will prevent in a year.
In fact, the Rolls-Royce Company states that “they
show such decidedly dangerous disadvantages that
they are considered unsafe to put in the hands of the
general public, and are not nearly the equal of the
powerful, efficient, lasting, and easily equalized brake
design now employed in our design."
Four-wheel brakes have been a bone of contention
in England since 1910, and yet today only 5 or 6 of the
150 odd English makes of cars use them at all. Several
manufacturers use them as optional equipment, or.
furnish them on one of their Models only.
Adherents of four-wheel brakes claim that they
(1) permit quicker stopping and (2) prevent skidding.
These are the only claims made for four-wheel brakes.
With front-wheel brakes fully applied, quicker stop
ping is possible. This is not denied.
That quick stopping which locks the front wheels
cs an advantage, is vigorously denied. Such stopping
«s positively dangerous, because steering control is
immediately lost.
The claim that four-wheel brakes prevent skidding
and sliding is denied. No matter what kind of brakes
are used, skidding will occur if wheels are locked be
fore the momentum of the ear te offset by the resist
ance of the road or pavement, whether dry or wet.
Skidding on wet pavement* can be reduced to the
minimum, with either two-or four-wheel brake*, on Zy
by slSwing down speed and gentle brake pressure with
clutch engaged.
Disadvantages of Four- Wheel Brahes
Against the only advantage (?) of four-wheel brakes,
namely, quicker stopping, there are six serious dis
advantages which make them mechanically imprac
ticable, dangerous, uncomfortable, and expensive to
owners, as follows:
1. Danger of Accidents. With permission, we quote
from a recent circular of the Rolls-Royce Company to
their dealers, upon which we cannot improve:
“Basically, tha fault with front-wheel brakes lies in the
danger of front-wheel skids, which are uncontrollable and
consequently vastly more dangerous than a rear-wheel skid.
“It must be appreciated, first of all, that for their ability to
steer the ear the front wheels depend on their rolling motion.
When front wheels cease to roll they lose all power to steer
the car, which slides straight ahead on a flat road, or into
the ditch if on a crowned or cambered road.
“When the brakes are used in an emergency it is of primary
importance that the direction of the car should be under con
trol! that is, that the car can be steered from the time that
the Drakes are applied until it is brought to a complete stop.
“When an obstacle suddenly presents itself (as in night
driving) the driver’s instinct is to immediately apply the
brakes as hard as possible.
“If, under these conditions, the front wheels are suddenly
locked, disaster may overtake the driver, through inability
to control the cars direction, even though it may stop
before meeting the obstacle.
i “In traffic driving the ability to dodge—to control tho
direction of the car—is of almost equal importance with tho
ability to stop.
“On a wet ’or sprinkled city street, granting that the
front-wheel brakes were perfectly equalized, the car would
slide straight ahead unable to take advantage of traffic
conditions, either right or left.
“If the brakes were not perfectly equalized, immediately
the pressure was applied, the front wheels would take on a
skid, which would be uncontrollable, in whichever direction
the equalization of the brakes was faulty.
* “In traffic driving, under most favorable conditions (per
fectly equalized brakes and dry pavement) a sudden applica
tion of the brakes checks the car so precipitately that cars
following have been known to crash into the car ahead,
causing a rear end wreck through not having stopping room
and time.
“It is, of course, obvious that front-wheel brakes present
double die difficulty of keeping the brakes properly equalized.
“Aside from the above apparent defects in front or four
wheel braking, there is the stiffening effect on the steering
to »»ke into consideration when the brakes are applied, and
the drag on the steering unless the braking effects on both
wheels is absolutely equalized. This, of itself, constitutes
a serious disadvantage reflected in the handling of the car ”
2. Adjustments by Owner. Brakes must be properly
adjusted, lubricated, and kept free from dirt, gravel,
and foreign substances, to prevent unequal pressure
of brakes and possible locking of front wheels. The
burden of this responsibility rests on the owner, not
on the factory.
3. Added Impedimenta and Lubrication. Four
wheel brakes double the number of parts in the brak
ing mechanism, add about one hundred pounds of
unsprung weight to the front end of the car, and
create from twenty to thirty additional places (mostly
inaccessible) requiring lubrication which mast be
applied by hand.
4. Decreased Car Efficiency. The added weight,
extra parts, and increased friction resulting from four
wheel brakes decrease to some degree the emciency of
the car. Poorer acceleration, reduced hill-climbing
ability, and increased gasoline consumption result.
5. Harder Steering and Control. The increase in
unsprung weight, added parts, and friction neces
sarily increase the strength required to steer the car
and to operate the brakes.
6. Expense of Maintenance. Extra service work in
repairing, adjusting, and relining brakes puts the car
in the shop oftener and increases the expense of
maintenance.
Patent Situation
Four-wheel brakes have been in existence for about
twenty years, during which time thousands of patents
have been taken out in Europe and the United States,
many of which have expired, and it is very doubtful if
there are any basic patents preventing the use of
four-wheel brakes.
European Experience
European manufacturers have experimented with
four-wheel brakes for two decades. English manu
facturers generally refuse to use them, although there
are a few exceptions.
French manufacturers use them more generally,but
many cars are equipped with “servo mechanisms,’*,
which are an added attachment intended to prevent
locking of front wheels, insure equalization, ease the
pedal pressure, etc., but this device introduces further
complications of weight, lubrication and expense.
Trade Authorities^
AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES-July 12, 1923
“In tome cases the layout is such that the act of steering
tends to release the front-wheel brake, rendering it less
effective when the wheels are cramped. If, with this arrange
ment, steering is made harder, or the brakes less effective on
a curve, or when the vehicle must make a sudden turn—as it
must often do in an emergency—there is grave reason to
doubt whether the braking is any safer with four- than with
two-wheel brakes.''
MOTOR WORLD—June 6, 1923
“If necessary precautions are not taken, skidding is liable
to be more frequent and more serious than with rear brakes
only.”
Studebaker9s Position
Studebaker research and engineering departments
have been studying, experimenting with, and testing
four-wheel brake mechanisms for two years.
*
These tests merely convince us that four-wheel
brakes are unnecessary, mechanically impracticable,
and dangerous in the hands of unskilled drivers.
The 1924 model Studebaker cars are equipped with
brakes on the rear wheels only. The foot pedal op
erates the external contracting brakes and easily locks
both wheels.
The hand lever operates the internal expanding
brakes, and likewise locks the wheels easily.
The foot brakes are used in driving, and the hand
brakes to hold the car still when parked on grades,
also in emergencies, if necessary.
Studebaker hra&saare-safe, simple, and practicable.
There are.no more reliable brakes in use on any
automobiles.
The 19X4 model Studebaker car* are not, and will not be. equipped with four-wheel brakes
oTtob.Hi"dmTil*na The Studebaker Corporation of America
0. N. BONNEY MOTOR COMPANY
* 2550 FARNAM STREET
THIS IS A TUDE ^ K E