I have silicone in 2 cars at the moment...I will change the others when I can. I have silicone in my '57 Fury, and '56 Belvedere for almost 20 years! What does he mean by "no warning" exactly? I've lost brakes a few times with dot 3 and 4...no fun, but it usually is a no warning situation. When you drive old cars fast, you have to be careful, period! ...or don't drive them that fast! Silicone is the way to go.John Kuegel--
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 5:22 PM, John Grady<jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:there is a very slight chance the military knows more than Jeff . Just sayinI know it’s slight , ( another subject) but I agree with 100000 stored vehicles stored 25 years and brakes work ,,and no fat in that fire personallyjust sayinjgOn Aug 16, 2024, at 4:36 PM, 'Ron Waters' via Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:--Must resist commenting on this thread… Must resist commenting on this thread… Must resist commenting on this thread… Must resist commenting on this thread…
Ron
From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 3:18 PM
To: John Lazenby <french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Hugh Boultbee <oldtruckspares@xxxxxxx>; Charles Schoendorf <cschoend@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Henry Schleimer <henry.schleimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Nick Taylor <nicksgaragesd@xxxxxxxxx>; James Douglas <jdd@xxxxxxxxxx>; Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Remote Brake Booster
I also use Jeff at Karps as the one who takes care of any of my brake issues and he always does things very well, plus he is local to me too. One thing that Jeff maintains is that the use of silicone fluid in our older brake systems is not recommended "because when brakes fail, the use of silicone gives you no warning whereas regular fluid usually does give you some warning before failure".
I have, however, seen many posts on this site where the consensus seems to be that the use of silicone fluid is the way to go with some even maintaining that they change over from regular to silicone fluid without even changing any of the brake parts before doing a changeover. These folks claim that they have done like hundreds/thousands of changeovers to silicone fluid with no changes of parts and have never had an issue.
I personally would like to change over to silicone on all my cars but Jeff keeps maintaining that is an unsafe way to go. I personally feel that doing brake work on these older total contact brake systems is a pain and religiously make sure I flush the systems at least every year. Because I have several of these cars I would like to take that task off my list of things that must be done to maintain them safely.
I realize this is a high visibility issue on this site and the consensus seems to be go with silicone (and I have not heard of a single failure using silicone fluid on this site) but Jeff's input is what makes me hold back so far. One thing Jeff also said to me was that with parts coming increasingly from overseas it is very hard to know the quality of the seals in these parts as well so that is also another reason he advocates for regular fluid. Some might postulate that the continued use of regular fluid keeps his business booming but he has recently had to hire more helpers since his volume is already very high as it is.
Given the consensus on this site from Club members I am very tempted to "just do it" anyway.
Steve Albu
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 8:45 AM 'John Lazenby' via Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Friday, August 16, 2024 at 06:12:40 AM PDT, Charles Schoendorf <cschoend@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A few years ago I bought a new vacuum booster to mount remotely in an early 50’s hot rod from Jeff at Karp’s Power Brakes in CA. It worked great. Price was reasonable.
Jeff also rebuilt the boosted master cylinder for my C-300.
Chuck
On Aug 16, 2024, at 4:05 AM, 'Hugh Boultbee' via Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My first post - I hope it ends up in the right place(s).
Remote brake servos for cars and light to medium commercial vehicles were specified for many UK built vehicles from the mid to late fifties onwards and the same underlying designs remained in use until maybe the late seventies for some model ranges. The pipe fittings probably remained UNF/SAE, throughout, usually 3/8” thread for 3/16” bore pipe, whereas the master cylinder based vacuum servos that started to appear in I suppose about the late sixties (in the UK) will have eventually been altered to have metric pipe fittings.
In the present collector vehicle spare parts market, the two primary choices available (even if that’s a tautology) will be as follows:
1. Girling design (various names could be searched for alongside ‘remote brake servo’, but particularly Powerstop, Mark 2A or Mark 2B
2. Lockheed design (just ‘Lockheed remote brake servo’ will find plenty of examples online)
One particular practical difference applies (plus probably also some special variations for certain applications) –
1. Girling remote servo – bracket location via the right-hand side of the cylinder casting (when viewed from behind the vacuum chamber)
2. Lockheed remote servo – bracket or direct to bodyshell location via studs attached to the outer half of the vacuum chamber (early small units two studs, later units all three studs)
These servos were also offered as dealer or amateur installed upgrades via either ‘universal’ or model specific accessory kits. Via my own experience and some research, for either factory fit or accessory, they seem to have varied upwards in size all the way from 5 inches (e.g. Mini Cooper) to maybe 8 or 9 inches (Jaguar, Alvis, Bristol, Jensen, commercial vehicles, etc.; possibly also used on some contemporary Ferrari/Lamborghini/Alfa Romeo models where Dunlop disc brakes would have applied)
Cylinder size and output pressure related data is probably quite easily findable, but I have nothing to offer there myself at present. In many cases the original build specified units will have been in association with either disc front/drum rear or discs at both front and rear (Dunlop or Girling). However, some drum/drum applications also applied, particularly for commercial vehicles.
Practical note 2 – many UK or USA based collector vehicle parts suppliers will be competing with each other to supply modern (maybe replica) versions of both of the above described remote servos, so shopping around and gauging the likely levels of experience and goodwill involved in each case will be a worthwhile venture. As ever, old stock will possibly turn out to provide the best engineering quality but complete disassembly of such a unit followed by reassembly with new seals on the hydraulic side might be advised (repair kits are probably available). Note, however, that the Girling vacuum chamber piston seal sometimes has to be installed by attaching its two ends together with adhesive (or at least I think so).
Final note – just remembered – for larger vehicles, this type of remote servo would be supported by a vacuum reservoir (and an associated vacuum gauge in the case of the relevant medium payload commercial vehicles)
I hope some of that may help.
HughOn Friday 16 August 2024 at 05:49:10 BST, Nick Taylor <nicksgaragesd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, I've been looking at the Australian ones. The VH40 is the 9 inch version. Same size as the one I need. But there still seems to be a lot of variations.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024, 9:33 PM Henry Schleimer <henry.schleimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don’t know if this helps at all but the VH44 boosters used as an option on all Australian built cars in the sixties are available over here. For example https://www.hemiperformance.com.au/shop/universal-vh44j-remote-brake-booster-kit-suit-disc-brakes-front-drum-brake-rear.html
But they typically were for 9 or 10 drums. My parent’s 67 Valiant had one from new with 9 inch drums and a master cylinder that looked the same as a typical 300 single, but I don’t know its bore diameter. Those brakes were over-boosted in my opinion and would lock all four crossplies if you stabbed the pedal. However, my father chose that option as he had an artificial leg.
But without knowing the diameter and stoke of each to compare, I can’t give any advice about compatibility. Maybe someone would like to delve deeper into this or just buy one to “suck it and see” as we say.
Hemi Performance also list a 9 inch version with higher psi output for disc braked cars but it isn’t cheap.
Cheers
Henry.
From: 'James Douglas' via Chrysler 300 Club International [mailto:chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, 16 August 2024 1:36 PM
To: Chrysler 300 List Server (chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: {Chrysler 300} Remote Brake Booster
About 10 years ago, when I “restored” my 1949 Desoto Convertible, I made one change to the car that was not stock. I rebuilt the car with a four-wheel disc brake system. The car stops too good!
I used the stock master cylinder, and I used a remote power brake booster like the one I had on my RAM 300K convertible in High School.
Midland Ross was sold a long time ago, but around 2013 the factory that made the boosters was still operating under another name. I managed to talk with the manufacturing manager who had started there in the 1970’s. We had a long talk. They were still making these boosters. The big issue was the special rubber parts were made now in Turkey. They are essentially he told me the same as the ones used in the 1950’s Ford Thunderbird.
I asked him if he had any of the pressure curves and he was kind enough to send me the two attached drawings. One with the pressures.
I found out that a couple of years later that the Turkey plant burned down and they had stopped making any of these remote units anymore.
One can try to see if the Ford Thunderbird suppliers are still sitting on any.
Best, James
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB61714A79B3CE11111A3EC1C593812%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/002101daf01b%24edbb28a0%24c93179e0%24%40comcast.net.
--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/DB64C9FC-F542-4EB6-8704-C84AA1BA9F2F%40gradyresearch.com.
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/537498899.4649242.1723845056142%40mail.yahoo.com.
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network
Archive Sitemap