KULTULZ

The reason(s) the single reservoir worked over the subsequent GM and FORD style dual reservoir is not because of the RESIDUAL PRESSURE VALVE incorporated into the SGL RSVR MC.

Dennis has even less understanding of brake valving theory as per his description of his first changeover.

Now I should have left this alone, but want others who read this to hopefully understand basic hydraulic braking theory.

There is a huge difference in replacing an OEM MC original install and a changeover kit. Your kits vendor offered very poor instruction(s). I am guessing that they a$$-u-me the kit purchaser has basic hydraulic knowledge, is going to farm the install out to a professional or are just ignorant and/or don't give a damn.

__________________
DISCLAIMER-

The above posted information is in my opinion only. It may contain copy and paste material(s). Your opinion(s) and mileage may vary.

DanH

klutz , that wasn't the reason , I thought klutz is RESITDUDE GUY.

what was the reason the klutz .

Klutz , I come to the conclusion that your not able to answer a question .
thats due to you having no knowledge of the subject .

you do have a Pro check and top of your brake fluid don't you ?
you did it yourself , you would feel unsafe on the road . thank you for thinking of others also on the road by getting a pro .

__________________
a KLUTZ in a Auto Shop is like a bull in a China Shop

FEandGoingBroke

Will you please SPIT IT THE HELL OUT MAN?

You BOLDLY state right here in this quote that you have yet to see the proper method offered or described.

I can make ANYTHING stop and well becasue I KNOW what goes on in a braking system, but you're making noise here and keeping me in the dark! I want to know just as much as anyone the right way to do it.

So get off you ass and DESCRIBE the damn thing will you?

And AGAIN, you do it HERE: Don't be a dink and stay MUTE on the subject SPILL THE DAMN BEANS man. What is the difference?

__________________

http://www.vintagevehiclerestoration.com

KULTULZ

F,

I have given and repeated in this thread and others how and why. No one chose to listen. Damn if I am going to retype all of that info.

All I said is the reason the SGL RSVR worked over either style DUAL RSVR is not what they thought it was. It is only an observation offered to hopefully help someone else going through this or about to go through it.

Now get it through your head. I am not going to repeat myself many times over. Your cars stop. Why are you haranguing me?

__________________
DISCLAIMER-

The above posted information is in my opinion only. It may contain copy and paste material(s). Your opinion(s) and mileage may vary.

puttster

Boys, you are taking up public space for your private agendas. Why not handle this through PM's?

__________________
When you're going through hell, keep going.
Putts drives a 1965 four door Galaxie. Rebuilt 390. 4100 on a Performer, AC, PS, PB w scarebird front discs, COM MX transm w/3.0 R.E. The seats, dash and hood are customized.

FEandGoingBroke

OK K,

You wrote it before. What post was it in? I did skip a lot of these replies a few pages back....


DanV, you DO understand that the volume sent per inch of Pedal travel in the Dual Line Master is a percentage LESS than the line volume sent by the single line MC?

I believe that you must increase the master's stroke in the Dual line master to compensate for it's loss in percentage of total fluid volume moved...

__________________

http://www.vintagevehiclerestoration.com

dennis111

Very simple, he can't even in the simplest terms. His mode of operation is to divert and deflect to something else. Hmmm, smells like another damn politician.

His diversion:

I kept my end and now the truce is broken again.

My experimentation with swapping disc brakes was several decades ago when I was a broke college student. I got everything off the spindles and tried to make it work with the factory drum MC. It didn't work so I saved up some money and swapped on a "then expensive" $65 disc brake MC and Voilà, it worked perfectly.

I learned something that day from HANDS ON EXPERIENCE, not from the internet (which hadn't even been developed yet.) At that time we were programming the school's computers using cards.

So now I feel challenged to prove that valving is the difference between a disc and a drum MC. Unlike Klutz, I understand what is going on from actual experience.

First here is a diagram out of a Ford manual showing the guts of a drum brake MC:








Note the outlet residual check valve.

Here is the diagram of a single pot Disc brake MC:





So where is the residual check valve? I certainly know-again from actual experience.

Guess what I had in the attic? The exact disc MC used in the Ford diagram



I took it apart and what did I find?

All the exact parts shown in the above diagram:



Note the wire threaded through the MC. That is the open, non-valved port that is designed to feed the front disc brakes. Another photo showing it hanging from the shop by the same wire:



Looking at the tubing end all you find is a hole with an adapter to mount flared tubing:





So guess what is found on the port designed for the drum brakes?

Why its a residual check valve mounted deep in the MC that is covering the actual port:



(So even Ford literture can be wrong . . . . )

I think that I've proven who the BS'er is on that one. Its obvious that the closest experience that you have to hydraulic theory is what happens when you suck on a straw.

So Kultulz, how about an ACTUAL explanation as to why the OP had a different results using a drum based MC vs the 2 specific disc brake? Oh wait, you haven't explained crap yet in your own words when asked a specific question. I'm sitting down now so go ahead and spew out some more of your political based nonsense (and don't forget to call me names again too . . . )

To the "politician" who judges other's experiences even though he has none to offer in this discussion, I leave him with a garage paraphrase from Abraham Lincoln so he might learn something:

__________________
Dennis

65' STANG, Dart 428W NA, Toploader 4 Spd, 4:33, AFR 205's, Vic Jr. Intake, 950HP DP, 11.1 CR, Pump Gas

10.62@125.82

Racing Videos

DanH

funny about the volume , that was one of the first things coverd .

__________________
a KLUTZ in a Auto Shop is like a bull in a China Shop

PSIG

Wow, I can appreciate your effort. Nice job Dennis, and thank you.

David

__________________
-=≡ If it was easy everyone would do it ≡=-

RAGGAREN

LOL....That's awesome Dennis.....



klutz.....i got more useful, to the point info in 2 post that 57 Merc posted then all yours combined....

__________________
Lars...
64 galaxie 500 2dr fastback... 390 4v, 4spd close ratio toploader, 4.11 rear..far from perfect but getting there...

McCutcheon4

Thank you Dennis!

ShotRod64

Thanks for the pics! Even i could get that, picture reading makes so much more sense. Before i got to the last i noticed one had a check valve and one was full on so to speak.
Durn it dennis why didn't you post that 31 pages ago?!

Now i hope all the bickering ends real soon cause this is ridiculous!

DanH

I only see one check valve in the pics . non on the outlets . one outlet doesnt have the fitting installed for a brake line .

what did I miss ?

__________________
a KLUTZ in a Auto Shop is like a bull in a China Shop

KULTULZ

Can you please explain to me in simple terms what all of that was supposed to demonstrate? And in a civil manner?

Strange how SELECTIVE EDITING is applied here.

__________________
DISCLAIMER-

The above posted information is in my opinion only. It may contain copy and paste material(s). Your opinion(s) and mileage may vary.

KULTULZ

Lard, you are not capable of processing information.

__________________
DISCLAIMER-

The above posted information is in my opinion only. It may contain copy and paste material(s). Your opinion(s) and mileage may vary.