Forum Discussion
AH64ID
May 17, 2015Explorer
Yes the brakes are larger than your 2006. There was a small increase in size in 2010, and IIRC 2013. I will go and see what I can find for info.
EDIT:
2006 Front 13.9x1.39 Disc (313.2 in2), Rear 13.9x1.18 Disc (309.6 in2)
2010 Front 14.17x1.53 Disc (349.4 in2), 14.09x1.34 Disc (312.8 in2)
2015 Front 14.17x1.53 Disc (349.4 in2), 14.09x1.34 Disc (312.8 in2)
Looks like they are the same as they where in 2010, which is 11.5% bigger up front and 1% bigger out back.
It makes you wonder how much weight the brakes are really designed for?!?!? If the same brakes are used on a 14k GVWR as a 12,300 GVWR what is their true design weight?
FWIW: The 3500 C&C uses the same brakes as the 2500/3500 pickup. The 4500 C&C and 5500 C&C use the same brakes, which are also the same front and rear on those vehicles. 15.35" x 1.54" Disc (361.6in2).
EDIT:
2006 Front 13.9x1.39 Disc (313.2 in2), Rear 13.9x1.18 Disc (309.6 in2)
2010 Front 14.17x1.53 Disc (349.4 in2), 14.09x1.34 Disc (312.8 in2)
2015 Front 14.17x1.53 Disc (349.4 in2), 14.09x1.34 Disc (312.8 in2)
Looks like they are the same as they where in 2010, which is 11.5% bigger up front and 1% bigger out back.
It makes you wonder how much weight the brakes are really designed for?!?!? If the same brakes are used on a 14k GVWR as a 12,300 GVWR what is their true design weight?
FWIW: The 3500 C&C uses the same brakes as the 2500/3500 pickup. The 4500 C&C and 5500 C&C use the same brakes, which are also the same front and rear on those vehicles. 15.35" x 1.54" Disc (361.6in2).
About Travel Trailer Group
44,056 PostsLatest Activity: Dec 27, 2025