When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I did this with a Fox Body dual M/C in my 62 wagon. I used a 7/8" bore (vs the stock 1") to increase brake force. It's been working great for three years now.
Could you let know what it is off of I about to send it to a fab shop but would like to have has much as can for the to start. Fatman is going to set me up with a stub front end and brakes, then go from there , here is my car
Joe , are these ones that would fit my car for disc brakes I just started with this forum and trying to get it straight
Are you using the Fatman IFS for the 61-63 cars? The correct M/C probably depends on which brakes you are using. The 7/8" bore M/C I used is right for the stock four wheel drum brakes, but may not be the best match for you, as that front end uses five lug wheels and aftermarket calipers. Also, what are you doing with the rear brakes, since they need to be changed with the front? Again, this will impact the decision on the correct M/C to use.
Are you using the Fatman IFS for the 61-63 cars? The correct M/C probably depends on which brakes you are using. The 7/8" bore M/C I used is right for the stock four wheel drum brakes, but may not be the best match for you, as that front end uses five lug wheels and aftermarket calipers. Also, what are you doing with the rear brakes, since they need to be changed with the front? Again, this will impact the decision on the correct M/C to use.
First thank you for your time and info. yes on the front end and also yes on the rear, did not talk about the M/C with fatman . I'm doing anything special this car is original and just trying to make it safer and reliable to drive. So again anything to help would be great
Mike
You don't want to hear this, but the most reliable car is the one that is totally stock and properly maintained. Sorry, but despite what the magazines and zootube videos may say, NO aftermarket part has anywhere near the same level of engineering and reliability testing than was done by the factories. Couple that with variabilities in installation skill and the reliability gets even worse. The factory tested the stock brakes with the linings and drums brand new and worn to the replacement limits, with the car empty and fully loaded, on dry pavement, wet, snow, ice, and dirt. Any bets on how much any aftermarket system has been tested?
No, I'm not going to tell you that the stock 9.5" drums will stop better than PROPERLY ENGINEERED AND INSTALLED disc brakes. Unfortunately, nearly every aftermarket system I've seen isn't properly engineered, and installation is usually even worse. Given the number of times I've read threads by people who can't even bleed their brakes, I have little confidence in the ability to properly engineer a system out of aftermarket parts. People don't understand the relationship between M/C bore, wheel cylinder bore, and lining dimensions. They don't understand how tire diameter, weight, and coefficient of friction impact braking. They think that the MUST have a proportioning valve without even understanding what it does. And the fact that aftermarket brake suppliers don't even know the difference between a proportioning valve and a metering valve gives me little confidence in the quality of their systems. Heck, Olds had a wide variety of proportioning valve part numbers for specific models and applications, yet the aftermarket offers two, the PV2 version for front discs and the PV4 for four wheel discs. Do you REALLY think those two part numbers are correct for every car that gets disc brakes.
Sorry, but people who think they MUST modify a car for "reliability" are kidding themselves or drinking the koolaide.
I get the impression that you are paying a shop to do this work. Ask them what calipers they are planning to use, what rear brakes they plan to use, what weight distribution the car will be set up for, what tires are being used, and based on that, what is the correct M/C bore to use. This should be a system design, not a mishmash of parts that were featured in magazines.
You don't want to hear this, but the most reliable car is the one that is totally stock and properly maintained. Sorry, but despite what the magazines and zootube videos may say, NO aftermarket part has anywhere near the same level of engineering and reliability testing than was done by the factories. Couple that with variabilities in installation skill and the reliability gets even worse. The factory tested the stock brakes with the linings and drums brand new and worn to the replacement limits, with the car empty and fully loaded, on dry pavement, wet, snow, ice, and dirt. Any bets on how much any aftermarket system has been tested?
No, I'm not going to tell you that the stock 9.5" drums will stop better than PROPERLY ENGINEERED AND INSTALLED disc brakes. Unfortunately, nearly every aftermarket system I've seen isn't properly engineered, and installation is usually even worse. Given the number of times I've read threads by people who can't even bleed their brakes, I have little confidence in the ability to properly engineer a system out of aftermarket parts. People don't understand the relationship between M/C bore, wheel cylinder bore, and lining dimensions. They don't understand how tire diameter, weight, and coefficient of friction impact braking. They think that the MUST have a proportioning valve without even understanding what it does. And the fact that aftermarket brake suppliers don't even know the difference between a proportioning valve and a metering valve gives me little confidence in the quality of their systems. Heck, Olds had a wide variety of proportioning valve part numbers for specific models and applications, yet the aftermarket offers two, the PV2 version for front discs and the PV4 for four wheel discs. Do you REALLY think those two part numbers are correct for every car that gets disc brakes.
Sorry, but people who think they MUST modify a car for "reliability" are kidding themselves or drinking the koolaide.
I get the impression that you are paying a shop to do this work. Ask them what calipers they are planning to use, what rear brakes they plan to use, what weight distribution the car will be set up for, what tires are being used, and based on that, what is the correct M/C bore to use. This should be a system design, not a mishmash of parts that were featured in magazines.
Joe my first thought was wow, of course I'm not an engineer but I believe you have a much better handle on this than the shop I was talking to. This is going to require much contemplating going forward on which way to go or stay. I love my car but have let general upkeep slide and ashamed of that. If I may this all started with the suspension which seems to have dropped ( if I can say that ) from what it was when I bought it in 2011, then one thing led to another. Your patience is greatly appreciated any thought on that while I'm decide about the brakes
the Mike in canada
If you are using a dual master cylinder with the shallow cup for the pushrod, be sure to include the "derby hat" pushrod retainer so it can't fall out leaving you with no brakes. Inline Tube offers a reproduction INL12439
If you are using a dual master cylinder with the shallow cup for the pushrod, be sure to include the "derby hat" pushrod retainer so it can't fall out leaving you with no brakes. Inline Tube offers a reproduction INL12439
Joe, the factory single circuit M/C uses a different retainer, and the Fox-body dual circuit M/C I used incorporates a completely different but equally positive pushrod retainer.
Joe, the factory single circuit M/C uses a different retainer, and the Fox-body dual circuit M/C I used incorporates a completely different but equally positive pushrod retainer.
June 24th, 2014, 12:04 PM
