Rear brake shoes

[don t. - 72gmc]

Bought a set from Napa. The part I wanted wasn't available. The computer was forced to their Fleet version. I bought the Fleet version but they did not fit due to the parking brake stud would not fit in the brake shoe hole PLUS the brake shoe was 3-times the thickness of the original shoe.
Ended up buying the rear shoes from ORiely's.
These don't look right either.
Original on the left...
Original in front...

To my untrained mind, they're close but Im not sure I want to use them.

Thoughts are appreciated.
Thanks much,
don t.

[sick472]

That's funny, I bought rear shoes for my 72 C10 just a few months ago from Napa...no problems.

I wonder if the shorter pad lengths are due to more modern pad materials...IDK.

[chevmn]

1/2 ton, or 3/4? I purchased shoes for my C20 with Dana 60, and looked same.....new had shorter linings. (If my old shoes looked like yours, I would have used them). I put the new ones on, but am not real happy about it.

edit... noticed one of your other posts, and looks like 3/4 ton with Dana...same as I have, and looks exactly like your situation. As I said, wish my old shoes were that thick, I would have used them, but one of mine was really sad, and I even had to replace my drums, which was odd considering my truck only has 62,000 miles, but original owner towed a camper with it, and I believe he towed in the mountains, so brakes likely had a workout.

[Smitty]

Don’t know where he located them. But my mechanic was able to find original shoes with rivets. Not bonded.

[Steeveedee]

I've been seeing this style shoe lately, being posted here. Not sure what the deal is. I have a C20 Longhorn with a D60 axle, and the shoes I bought at NAPA were fully lined on all four- not having shorter friction material on the primary shoe. I could make a case for the shorter lining on the rear shoe, if the materials were up to snuff...but I wouldn't buy them. I was a state-licensed ASE-Certified brake mechanic back in the day, and I'm hard-headed enough about heat dissipation as a mechanical engineer later in life that I just wouldn't trust that short a section of friction material.

[bob arrington]

rockauto?

[don t. - 72gmc]

Originally Posted by Steeveedee

I could make a case for the shorter lining on the rear shoe, if the materials were up to snuff...but I wouldn't buy them.

Im a retired computer geek that likes to play w/old iron. When I looked at the new shoes, saw the big differences, was not a fan. They just don't look right. Maybe its just me? I dunno. They are going back to Orielly's.

Originally Posted by bob arrington

rockauto?

Not a big fan on internet purchases, but there are no other feasible options near my home. Looks like rockauto might have what Im looking for. Atleast the pics look good(big grin).
https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo...5LnoxlTw%3D%3D

Have fun,
don t.

[60case]

I used the same set on my Dana 60 and they work fine

[mr.mud1]

hi,not sure if your truck is a c-20?i just did the brakes on my 72 cheyenne super 20 with a Dana rear.i bought Raybestos 127PG rear shoes from Rock Auto along with new rear wheel cylinders,brake hose,fit perfect and looked like the shoes i took off,a shorter primary shoe,as it's supposed to be but not as short as your new ones?my new shoes were just like your originals.

[mr.mud1]

sorry,i just looked at your link to Rock Auto.obviously a c-20.same shoes i used,you'll be happy with them.take care.Greg

[don t. - 72gmc]

I did purchase these....
https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo...5LnoxlTw%3D%3D

Compared old to new.
Metal frame work and pad length was identical to what I removed.
Rock Auto picture shows shoes attached w/rivets.
What I got was bonded.
Installed em anyway w/no problems.

Have fun,
don t.

[mr.mud1]

Beautiful, glad it worked out for you.my brakes are working like new,I'm sure yours will too.take care.