XPost: comp.os.linux.misc   
   From: robin_listas@es.invalid   
      
   On 2025-12-12 18:49, rbowman wrote:   
   > On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 14:19:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   >   
   >> Did they crash often, I wonder? Difficult to stop a 2 ton box of metal   
   >> in time.   
   >   
   > Not really. The brakes were designed to handle the load. A big problem was   
   > the single circuit hydraulic system that could leave you with no brakes   
   > except the mechanical hand brake. They were usually referred to as   
   > 'parking brakes' and weren't convenient to operate.   
   >   
   > I lost the brakes twice. The first time was in a manual transmission car   
   > and I was able to get home using the gears and handbrake if I had to stop   
   > for a light. The second time was in the 2 1/2 ton Lincoln. I was close to   
   > work and there was a slight uphill grade to the parking lot and I was able   
   > to kill most of the speed.   
      
   I know what to do, but I never lost the brakes.   
   The third car my father bought boasted double brake circuit (each   
   circuit handling 3 wheels (one front, two rear, I think)).   
      
   >   
   > The dual systems are much better. I lost the front brakes on my pickup   
   > after a porcupine chewed through the hose. Coming down a mountain road was   
   > interesting since most of the braking power is on the front wheels but at   
   > least there was something.   
   >   
   > Even with fully operational brakes people who depended solely on the   
   > brakes on mountain roads could get a rude awakening when they overheated.   
   > Even with the AT in the Toyota I habitually shift down to 2nd or even 1st   
   > on grades. Modern ATs are much better. The early versions would freewheel.   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   Cheers, Carlos.   
   ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)