70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
How does this look? (ya its sloppy but threw it together in five mins) A schematic................its missing one brake line??? Where's does it go??
Fuselage - Drums to Disc Brake Conversion
- Thread starter 70_NPORT
- Start date
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
No..... Wrong. Slow down...
Deep breaths...
Deep breaths...
Don't do it that way.
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
Deep breaths...No..... Wrong. Slow down...
Deep breaths...
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
no comprendé.
What?
65sporty
Old Man with a Hat
If your valve looks like fig 3 above than that is a factory proportioning valve. No need for another valve.
His looks similar to that, but because it was a drum brake car, it's not a proportioning valve.
The way the lines connect into it is just the same though.
SF-66TC
Well-Known Member
Gary again paves the way for those who haven't personally done a disc brake conversion and/or added a prop valve to their brake system.
I think I can clear things up so Gary's head doesn't explode LOL!
The reason my DB looks different than yours Gary is because my car was a '66 which came with a SINGLE CIRCUIT Master Cylinder. The Single Circuit master is also the reason why I have a 4-port DB vs your 5-port DB. In '67 MaMopar complied with the feds and upgraded their braking systems to DUAL CIRCUIT Master Cylinders as well as incorporated the safety warning switch. In the dual circuit system an additional INLET PORT was added to the DB.
Just FYI - Internal to your 5-port DB is a valve which sensed the differential pressure between the front and rear brake lines. When fluid pressure on either side of the brake system (front vs rear) is reduced ie; due to a leak in the system, the valve would simply move to the low pressure side and ground out the switch which in turn lights the brake warning lamp on the dash. It was really useless because by the time the light came on the brake pedal would have have already hit the floor.
Back to your scenario - I mentioned to you to get R.Ehrenbergs fittings and new brake lines for several of reasons.
As he said, you just need a short 3/16 tubing with the same fitting on each end - one end to connect to the DB and the other end to the INLET side of the PV. For the OUTLET side of the PV all you would need to do is connect the REAR DRUM line that was originally removed from the DB to it.
IF you want to run new lines you can -
Just duplicate what you already have and install the PV as Big_John suggested OR bypass the DB and Run a new line from the MC/FRONT PORT to the INLET of the PV and connect the REAR DRUM line to the OUTLET of the PV instead of the DB. You will need TWO PLUGS for your DB in that case.
Sorry for the confusion, but you're a PRO NOW!
Note: the warning switch/light is not needed - there's a reason why it's really called an IDIOT LIGHT LOL!
I think I can clear things up so Gary's head doesn't explode LOL!
The reason my DB looks different than yours Gary is because my car was a '66 which came with a SINGLE CIRCUIT Master Cylinder. The Single Circuit master is also the reason why I have a 4-port DB vs your 5-port DB. In '67 MaMopar complied with the feds and upgraded their braking systems to DUAL CIRCUIT Master Cylinders as well as incorporated the safety warning switch. In the dual circuit system an additional INLET PORT was added to the DB.
Just FYI - Internal to your 5-port DB is a valve which sensed the differential pressure between the front and rear brake lines. When fluid pressure on either side of the brake system (front vs rear) is reduced ie; due to a leak in the system, the valve would simply move to the low pressure side and ground out the switch which in turn lights the brake warning lamp on the dash. It was really useless because by the time the light came on the brake pedal would have have already hit the floor.
Back to your scenario - I mentioned to you to get R.Ehrenbergs fittings and new brake lines for several of reasons.
- The new master is larger than your old one and the existing brake lines most likely would not line up to the new master, although you may be able to hand bend the existing lines to line up with the new MC depending on the stiffness of the lines. Mine were too stiff...
- The fittings on the old master may not be in the best shape and may not fit correctly into the new master. My old fitting was not the same size nor thread type of the new MC.
- Since you're adding in a prop valve you'd have to add a new line anyway.
- Since this is a new braking system I felt it would be best to start fresh.
As he said, you just need a short 3/16 tubing with the same fitting on each end - one end to connect to the DB and the other end to the INLET side of the PV. For the OUTLET side of the PV all you would need to do is connect the REAR DRUM line that was originally removed from the DB to it.
IF you want to run new lines you can -
Just duplicate what you already have and install the PV as Big_John suggested OR bypass the DB and Run a new line from the MC/FRONT PORT to the INLET of the PV and connect the REAR DRUM line to the OUTLET of the PV instead of the DB. You will need TWO PLUGS for your DB in that case.
Sorry for the confusion, but you're a PRO NOW!
Note: the warning switch/light is not needed - there's a reason why it's really called an IDIOT LIGHT LOL!
Last edited:
SF-66TC
Well-Known Member
I posted it once before that PV are really unnecessary as the MaMopar did not install them IN the early disc brake cars. Obviously if the factory didn't require them, why would we? Contrary to that I DID install one because I got a good deal on an OEM Wilwood Mopar PV and figured it couldn't hurt.
Let me iterate again that the factory gold blocks WERE/ARE NOT Proportioning Valves - that's a misconception. They're merely a Fluid Distribution Block. If you split open a block you'll see they simply have a hollow core with the exception of the one's with the safety switch - their design & purpose explained earlier.
The front & rear brake wheel cylinders were different sizes which in affect did the duty of PV's.
Let me iterate again that the factory gold blocks WERE/ARE NOT Proportioning Valves - that's a misconception. They're merely a Fluid Distribution Block. If you split open a block you'll see they simply have a hollow core with the exception of the one's with the safety switch - their design & purpose explained earlier.
The front & rear brake wheel cylinders were different sizes which in affect did the duty of PV's.
Last edited:
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
Front of M/C has to go though the switch then to proportion valve other wise the switch will be bias one way all the time. Keeping the brake warning light on all the time.
SF-66TC
Well-Known Member
70bigblockdodge is correct..... OR you can just disconnect the wire at the switch on the DB as the functionality of the PV will work either way. So whichever way you feel most comfortable with go that route.
440_Magnum
Member
What are these "Chrysler" calipers of which you speak?
Chrysler never made calipers, they bought Kelsey-Hayes, Bendix, and Budd (the early C-body 4-piston disks that are rare as hen's teeth) brake systems. In the 90s and 00's they used Teves and Akebono calipers, and of course now Chrysler tends to use Brembo brake systems on the SRT vehicles.Back when I was doing disk conversions on my C- and B- 10+ years ago, the 1970s Kelsey-Hayes "pin type" single-piston caliper was the one that everyone generally preferred, though Chrysler seemed to use "pin" and "slider" calipers pretty interchangeably in the 70s, leaning more to sliders by the 80s. The "slider" calipers were said to be more prone to sticking, wearing one pad faster than the other, and so on. And that agrees with the old M-body Gran Fury my dad once owned, that thing had a lot of caliper issues compared to the pin-types on my old '73 B-body. I've never had a pin-type seize up on me like the Gran Fury's "slider" type would.
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
i just want my car to stop
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
Had to take a mental health day. Ready to get back on it tomorrow.
(brake lines came today, eburghs fittings tomorrow)
(brake lines came today, eburghs fittings tomorrow)
SF-66TC
Well-Known Member
What are these "Chrysler" calipers of which you speak?
Back when I was doing disk conversions on my C- and B- 10+ years ago, the 1970s Kelsey-Hayes "pin type" single-piston caliper was the one that everyone generally preferred, though Chrysler seemed to use "pin" and "slider" calipers pretty interchangeably in the 70s, leaning more to sliders by the 80s. The "slider" calipers were said to be more prone to sticking, wearing one pad faster than the other, and so on. And that agrees with the old M-body Gran Fury my dad once owned, that thing had a lot of caliper issues compared to the pin-types on my old '73 B-body. I've never had a pin-type seize up on me like the Gran Fury's "slider" type would.
I'm sure train tech 55 was referring to KH calipers.
A little more background on your information. Normally when companies make a part they improve them, but because of the budget crunch Chrysler re-engineered their braking system. The "pin-style" was introduced in '69 on the Imperials and C-bodies and continued on through '72-73, but then they changed the design and went to the sliders because they were cheaper to mfg. On the "sliders" the calipers move back and forth on the brackets 4-machined ways which also accepts all the forces. The problem was if there was a little bit of kink the caliper would bind up as your dad experienced on his Gran Fury. The "pin-style" caliper on the other hand has 6-machined ways as well as the pins to maintain alignment of the calipers - so no binding problem there. All that said, the sliders were actually a down-grade from the pin-style which as you said, makes them more preferred.
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
Napa brake lines, Eburgh fittings & a bending tool. I'm ready to put this to bed. (Steve I got your PM, thx for the extra clarification, I'll be using that for sure).
So you know you have to do some double flares with those fittings... Right?
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
Steve was good enough to give me a lead on a flaring tool:
Eastwood On Car Flaring Tool for 3/16 Tubing
A double flaring tool appears to be different?
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
"short 3/16 tubing with the same fitting on each end - one end to connect to the DB and the other end to the INLET side of the PV. For the OUTLET side of the PV all you would need to do is connect the REAR DRUM line that was originally removed from the DB to it".
So that's all I need to do?
Cut the fittings off the shortest piece of tube (neither fitting matches the other); add the NEW fittings, then flare each ends of the tube? The Allstar PV came with matching fittings but each fitting has a "nipple" type cone inside of it, I don't see how these will except a flared tube properly, or will they?
So that's all I need to do?
Cut the fittings off the shortest piece of tube (neither fitting matches the other); add the NEW fittings, then flare each ends of the tube? The Allstar PV came with matching fittings but each fitting has a "nipple" type cone inside of it, I don't see how these will except a flared tube properly, or will they?
That looks like a good tool! I'm interested to see how that works out for you. I may have to buy one.
Double flares are sometimes hard to make. The usual tool has a die that forms the first flare and then you remove the die and form the second flare. I have decent luck doing it, but it's about an 80% success rate for me to get it right the first time.
Similar threads
