RAMBOW

Attempted to install a new rear brake hose on my friends 66 442 last night- after removing the old one and comparing it- its nearly 3-4" shorter.

The new ones fittings are identical, but its 1" too short to reach the frame connection with the suspension fully dropped- which tells me the old one is the correct length (should not be tight when fully dropped)

His car has a Type 0 12 bolt in it, and the brake line screws into the top... but I find it amazing that a different year rear had such a longer line.

has anyone else run into this?

willj

sounds like same problem i had on my 65 starfire, ordered from three different places ,and all were not long enough. might of gotten by ,but with original master cyl did not want to take chance so i brought old one to napa , and matched as close aas i could , at least it is long enought , oh well good luck,will.

RAMBOW

i went on autozones website and they list the 66/67 one at 11" long- about the same as the one we got from rightstuff thats way too short.

Looked up one for a 70 vista cruiser- 14.5" long. I think that is the one we need.

OLDSMORAT

I own a old school parts house. Any thing i can get you. It's cost plus shipping. I'm not out to make money but help fellow oldsmobilers. We need to stand together to preserve oldsmobiles. So i'm here for all. I STILL HAVE ALL CATALOGS AND JUST NOT COMPUTERS

Yellowstatue

A '68 hose is shorter than a '69 hose because they (GM) moved the pass through hole outboard about 8" for '69... '69-'71 same hose...

Ranzan

Ben had the same problem with mine I had to use a 69 chevelle hose

66luvr

I had the same problem on the blue 66 with a 12 bolt Chevy rear. I, like you, went to the autozone site and looked at a lot of stuff. Some had the distribution block separate, some had it made into/onto the hose. I think I went with a 72 Cutlass which has the block built in because it was cheaper, like $17 or close.
Good luck,
Mike