My Lightning is the only truck I've ever seen that was setup like this... what gives?

It looks odd is all.

 

They were used for cost savings, off the shelf common parts. I believe they are common with the Navigator.

 

yeah but why not put bigger on front? Doesn't the front usually take like 70% of the braking load? It makes more sense for the fronts to be bigger...

 

Maybe Ford didn't have an "off the shelf" bigger front brake available.

 

Inside the hub of the rear disc brake is were they put the parking brake, thats why the disc is so big.....I guess it was easier than putting on a second caliper.
Dale

 

maybe it has something to do with the 57/43 weight bias

 

That's why the rear pads are about half the size of the fronts.

Braking power is a combination of piston area vs. master cylinder piston area, rotor clamped area and diameter, pad size, and friction material. With all of these taken into account, the "smaller" fronts provide far more stopping power than the rears.

 

The rears are not really "bigger". They may have a slightly larger overall diameter, but they don't have as much surface area as the fronts. They are also solid and not vented like the fronts and as Tim stated, the clamping force of the front calipers and pads is WAY greater.

 

"I agree 100%

 

Makes sense, thanks for the insight.

 

I have a question while we are on the weight subject. How much does the hitch weigh? Does taking it off affect traction at all?

 

The rear wheels spin significantly faster than the fronts, therefore they need larger breaks...

That's my story and I'm sticking to it!