I'll add to that, that the rear brakes only do 30% of the stopping. If you want to stop faster, just put some high quality disc brake pads and rotors on the front. It will definitely be easier and cheaper.
I can't imagine Dodge would have changed much between the mounting brackets for both drums and disks. It just doesn't make sense to change the brackets mounted to the rear suspension for those two types of brakes as the same "backing plate" mount can technically be used easily for both if a caliper mounting bracket is designed to work with the drum backing plate mount. To be honest, its simple engineering, not to mention it makes sense to use the same mounting plates on the rear end between the two setups from a cost standpoint.
On another note, besides the appearance factor of disk rear brakes, there is absolutely no benefit. Depending on setup, rear drums actually stop faster in some cases where drums and disks are available on the same vehicle. Drums have unfortunately gotten the stigma that they don't stop as well, which is quite the opposite than what actually happens in regular day to day driving. There is a reason big rigs still use drum brakes... On the flip side, drums will overheat MUCH faster than disks when used for auto racing, making them less desirable for such an application.
So, unless you have flashy wheels with open spokes, there is absolutely no benefit to disk brakes on the rear, even with the occasional track day. Who knows, you may actually perform better on a track than an identical car with rear disks.
The biggest problem with drum brakes (IMO) is debris removal. Disc brakes tend to "clean" themselves as you apply the brakes. The brake pads act like a squege, removing dirt and road debris. Drum braks have a backing plate, but when (and I say when because crap WILL get in there) debris gets past that backing it's far more likley to get wedged between the drum and the brake shoe. Even if stuff does get thrown behind the break shoe, it still has great odds of bouncing around back between the shoe and the drum.
I see this crap everyday at work... But this is nowhere near as big as I seemed to make it. Even disc brakes have a small posibility of getting debris between the pad and the rotor, but on a disc brake that debris can also fall out onto the ground, not potentially get trapped in a drum...
EDIT: Another big reason dics are preferred over drums for racing is brake release. Drum brakes (especially older drum brakes) could develop a habit of sticking to the drum for a moment after the brakes were released.
Both types of brakes can be equally effective.
Yes - drums can trap debris, and discs are practically self cleaning.
Both types have their share of problems, albeit different, but problems, nonetheless.
Discs tend to be simpler and less costly to make, Discs are also easier to inspect and service.
Pretty much six of one and half a dozen of the other, but due to the simpler mechanism, discs are typically the brake of choice nowadays.
Don't kid yourself discs are far superior to drum in brake fade resistance, total swept area, brake adjustment and clamping force on the rotor.
The rear drum is 9.0" x .85" and has a swept area of 78 sq. inches the rear rotor is 10.3" x 1.39" and a swept area of 138 sq. inches.
I've done 2 SRT-4 rear disc conversion on my 05 Neons and it's not that difficult and neither the prop valve or MC needed to be replaced.
If you don't have ABS the go to a bone yard and get the entire rear disc setup from a Cailber/Patriot/Compass or Avenger/Sebring but you'll need the Caliber e-brake cables though if go this way.
Get all the rear brake parts...backing plate, caliper adapter, rotor, caliper, brake lines, e-brake cables, e-brake shoes and e-brake parts.