Since you wrote this in 2005, is there any update to it I would need to refer to, I have a '95 2500 Cummins that is spongy at best on the brake pedal, it seems to bleed down when pressing/standing on it and at times when repeated step downs will actually lose the braking and drift forward, this occurs especially in parking lots where you are manuvering and going form drive to reverse and stepping on the brake, I have had the Vacumn checked at it was smack on for pressure per the book, the mech thought it might then be the upper lines causing the mushy, any thoughts on that?

 

Here is a up date as to the soft brakes on my 96 2500 V10 2wd. My brakes were fine without pulling a travel trailer but with the trailer they were lacking stopping power. The pickup has as of now only 72K miles on it. The front pads have been change twice and the last time was at 67K miles and the rear brake were still in really good shape. Because of the soft peddle I installed a new master cylinder, new shoes on the rear, and the larger Dodge 1 ton= 27mm = 1.06" rear cylinders from O'Reilly's. I didn't want to use the bigger GM ones because of the lockup of the rears. The peddle was much firmer but after the new shoes got seated in the rears were wheel hopping and the ABS was working overtime. A lot of chatter braking a HWY speed. It is only my guess the factory master cylinder never gave the rear brakes much braking power or would bleed off on hard braking. I changed out the larger rear brake cylinders to O'Reilly's original size cylinders ( Dodge pre-'97 2500-= 24mm = .94"). That took care of the wheel hop, lockup, chatter, and still retain the much harder peddle. Braking power is much better also. Driving in stop and go traffic the rear really heat up compared to what they use to and I can tell I have loads more braking from the rears. While keeping the larger rear cylinders to see how it goes when pulling the travel trailer, but I still don't like the chatter and wheel hop that should return without the trailer. Here is a TBS from Dodge going to the larger rear cylinders.

http://dodgeram.info/tsb/1997/05-04-97.htm

Without any added weight my pickup weighs a bit over 6200 lbs. and 75% of 8800 GW is 6600 lbs.

For my pickup a few more things I found out about the 2500 and 3500 brakes. The front calipers are the same but the 2500 disk pads are tapered on the ends while the 3500s are not. The booster is the same but the master cylinder is a different part number. I don't know what the difference it in the two master cylinders is but the 3500 cylinder would bolt up to the 2500 booster. The bore of both are the same also, so there must be something different with the master piston (maybe).

My pickup is not a dually and I seen a none dually 3500 2wd. I check to see if I could get the rear drums for that none dually for my 2500 and couldn't find new or used what drums were used on the rear of the 3500. My guess it uses the same drums that I have that the shoes are 2.5" wide and the duallys are 3.5" wide. Of course the dually drums won't fit on mine because those drums are too deep but the same diameter. The 3500 2wd none dually I seen had the same wheels as I have but I didn't get to see what rear drums were on it.

 

Dodge never made a 1 ton that wasn't a dually in the second gen trucks.

I am almighty curious what the difference in master is between the 2500, and 3500 though. Wonder if the rears would get a bit more pressure (volume?) given the much better traction of duals?

 

When we were on vacation this spring I seen a 3500 second generation none dually, 2wd same body style as mine 96 2500 that had the same rims as I so I wonder what rear brake drums he had. I checked and the none dually 3500 is third and forth generation.

 

The second gen had to have been modified then. So far as I know, ALL 3500's were duallies.

2500's would have dana 60 or 70 rear axles, depending on engine, they all had the same size drums in the back though.

 

2500 diesel manual wouldve got the 80 in the rear.

 

Yup. As did all the 3500's.

 

So my truck has a dana 60 in the front , does that mean my rear has a dana 60? My build sheet says 200mm. I thought I read in other posts others asking the same question but no answer was given. I mean they couldnt figure out what they were measuring cuz 200 mm is smaller than the 1500 axles.

 

I believe that is axle shaft diameter. What you need to keep in mind there is, the ONLY thing the axle is doing, is moving the truck. It doesn't support ANY weight, as the axles are full-floating. So, don't need to be as large as an axle that bears the weight of the truck, plus, whatever it is loaded with.

But yes, you should have a D60 in the rear.

 

So that explains why the D60 in the front is so much larger than the D60 in the rear.
You are the master and I am but the learner.