Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical 4 wheel power drums

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Roothawg, Jan 23, 2022.

  1. tomcat11
    Joined: Mar 31, 2010
    Posts: 821

    tomcat11
    Member

    The part where we were about to re-invented the wheel?

    All kidding aside everything you posted is dead nuts on.
     
    Mr48chev likes this.
  2. tomcat11
    Joined: Mar 31, 2010
    Posts: 821

    tomcat11
    Member

    And one reservoir to drain:(
     
  3. Good point and I also re read the first post, he wants to run a booster. So that makes my deleted post wrong anyhow.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  4. redo32
    Joined: Jul 16, 2008
    Posts: 2,137

    redo32
    Member

    In the days before fancy stuff like boosters and proportioning valves, the engineers adjusted front to rear bias by altering the area of fiction material on the brake shoes. Most of the braking is done with the front so you want the biggest shoes available. If the rear gets light and locks up simply hacksaw off an inch or two of the lining.
     
    Tow Truck Tom and Roothawg like this.
  5. The diagonal split braking system was put on front wheel drive vehicles at Chrysler, front rear split on rear wheel drive/ four wheel drive. When maximum braking the front wheel drive vehicle has most of the weight transferred to the front wheels as the weight of the sideways engine and transmission was mounted on top of the front wheels. Then when you factored in the weight transfer under hard braking the rear wheels didn't do much of the braking. I always run front /rear split on my hot rods with a dual master cylinder but haven't ran a proportioning valve on my 4 wheel drum systems, only on the disc/drum ones.
     
    Ned Ludd and Roothawg like this.
  6. joel
    Joined: Oct 10, 2009
    Posts: 2,467

    joel
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I had a dual chamber MC (Corvair) in another '40 coupe and a drum drum non-power system. The front drums were were off a '65 Chevy station wagon ,11 x 2 1/4 I think and the rears were Nova , 9 1/2 dia. It worked well . The master was mounted under the floor with stock pedals.
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  7. 1932tub
    Joined: May 31, 2005
    Posts: 416

    1932tub
    Member

    Look at the vh44 remote booster and just boost the front brakes
     
  8. Budget36
    Joined: Nov 29, 2014
    Posts: 13,174

    Budget36
    Member

    I’m curious if you’ve ever had a ‘36 PU weighed? I should probably just Google it someday, But I always thought a stock one was like 2500lbs?
     
  9. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 24,523

    Roothawg
    Member

    I have not. I have read different things on the web. I have seen anywhere from 2550-3350. With all of the stuff we add on them, interior etc. I figured I would lean towards the heavier side.

    Sorry to Confuse the issue with the 60-62 C10 MC. Forget I mentioned that. I am just trying to make a decision here.

    Just trying to make this thing as drivable as possible.
     
    Budget36 likes this.
  10. oldiron 440
    Joined: Dec 12, 2018
    Posts: 3,299

    oldiron 440
    Member

    Not true,you have differences between the front and rear to compensate for just in weight and tires.
    The stock car guys used drums back in the 60s and 70s you don't think they didn't use ajustable propositioning valves?
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2022
    seb fontana likes this.
  11. Moriarity
    Joined: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 30,776

    Moriarity
    SUPER MODERATOR
    Staff Member

    I thought you were going to run a manual transmission and that was the reason for the 62 pickup master cylinder. I have piles of cars with single master cylinders without any issues, but I am good about making sure everything is in good condition with inspections of brake hoses etc. are you planning to neglect periodic maintenance and that is why you think you need a dual res master??
     
  12. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 24,523

    Roothawg
    Member

    I have been a QC Inspector in the Aviation business for years. Everything in the aircraft world has a redundant system built in, just in case. They are maintained on a rigorous maintenance schedule and they still build it in.
    It carried over in everything I do.

    Yes, I am running a stick in the truck. That’s why I originally bought the C10 MC and pedal. Just weighing out all my options Hoss.

    Some folks see a glass half full , I see the glass fell over and started a fire in an Elementary school….
     
    loudbang and VANDENPLAS like this.
  13. Moriarity
    Joined: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 30,776

    Moriarity
    SUPER MODERATOR
    Staff Member

    I get it, but in a car you can get out and walk, not so in an airplane.....
     
    joel, F-ONE and Roothawg like this.
  14. cabong
    Joined: Nov 29, 2005
    Posts: 881

    cabong
    Member

    When I put the parts and pieces together from Ak Miller's El Caballo, I used the same brake setup as when it was first built. Brakes were all '54 Lincoln, which should have been fine. But, that heavy bugger would not stop for crap. I tried several master cylinders too no avail. I talked to Ak about it, and he couldn't make'm work any better. Then one day I saw a photo of the critter under construction, back in '53. Right where the drivers seat should be, was the sweetest hydro-vac unit from a Ford truck. I asked Ak about it, and he grinned, and said he forgot. I installed one, and the puppy would stop on a dime, and give nine cents change !! The picture was from this article, but I lost it years ago... early el caballo.jpg
     
    Budget36 and Roothawg like this.
  15. Roothawg
    Joined: Mar 14, 2001
    Posts: 24,523

    Roothawg
    Member

    True, if you can get it stopped….if not, you call a wrecker and an ambulance.
    We will see what gets worked out. All I can do is dream right now.
     
    loudbang and VANDENPLAS like this.
  16. Or change out the rear wheel cylinders to a smaller diameter by 1/16" to balance the front/rear braking.

    Wheel cylinders are cheap compared to adjustable proportioning valves.
     
  17. Bandit Billy
    Joined: Sep 16, 2014
    Posts: 12,286

    Bandit Billy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I paid a lot of money for this CPP M/C, built in proportioning valve, built in brake light switch, two reservoirs "like a corvette M/C" they claim, chrome plated aluminum so it is light. I used it on my roadster when I built it. When I went to fill it the brake fluid filled both sides a the same time. Seems the center divider doesn't reach all the way to the bottom so the chambers equalize. Basically it is a really big single pot M/C. It came with a an extra top that allows for a remote reservoir which I used. No idea why it was built that way.

    Oh, it has worked very well for a few years now. Pretty too and it did make for a tidy install under the car which was the whole idea.
    upload_2022-1-24_22-6-54.png
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  18. manyolcars
    Joined: Mar 30, 2001
    Posts: 9,176

    manyolcars

    When I added power brakes to my 57 chevy, the guy at Master Power brakes told me that I did not need a proportioning valve but I needed a hold off valve so the front brakes didnt come on until the rears got 125 pounds of pressure. Its been working Great for about 20 years or so
     
    Roothawg likes this.
  19. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,025

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    Volvo had a 3-way split system at one time, in the '70s iirc when they really traded on their safety image. The front calipers had two cylinders, with one of each front cylinder tied together in one circuit, and the remaining front cylinders and the rear cylinders split diagonally. I have no information as to how well it worked.
     
  20. PhilA
    Joined: Sep 6, 2018
    Posts: 2,061

    PhilA
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    1. Hydro Tech

    I've had vehicles with diagonal split brakes and ones with front/rear with the triplet system. In everyday use they were fine, the majority of the braking force imbalance bring provided by the design of the brakes at the front versus the back (the rear wheels having smaller bores and also only a single leading shoe).

    The fluid redundancy with the twin X split system was in the master cylinder, basically your foot pushes two masters stacked end to end which operate independently. Bringing a car to a halt that's lost fluid in one half is interesting but totally possible.

    The other one uses the same type of master with two independent fluid systems, one energizes the rear brakes, the other hits a shuttle valve and then goes to the front brakes; if one front circuit opens up, the pressure difference causes the shuttle to shoot over and block off the failed circuit. This activates a light from a switch on the shuttle. That then needs to be disassembled and reset once the failure has been remedied. That is simply a safety feature.

    The only other car I've had with a dissimilar system is as Squirrel describes, except once the system pressure exceeded a certain point it shut off any more going to the rear brakes to prevent them locking up under a pedal stamp. That also incorporated a valve that was attached between the body and the rear axle, which decreased the pressure point at which the rear brakes stopped receiving any more pressure depending on how heavily the vehicle was loaded and also how much it pitched up and the weight transfer was biased towards the front of the vehicle.

    So, to answer, I would suggest an X split because in a case of hydraulic failure you still retain one front wheel to brake with, you'll also have a mechanical system operating the rear brakes (you will have an E brake, right?) which is a last ditch backup.
    Balance the system mechanically first by having double acting shoes up front, smaller bore cylinders and only a single acting shoe up rear. That's how GM did it for my Pontiac and it works well. Don't complicate the hydraulic system if you don't have to. The fronts always lock first under panic braking, the rears take a significantly harder shove to lock up. You'll have that extra under your foot with a booster but that's all it gives, extra effort parallel to your own.
    Pulling the front and rear brakes from the same type of vehicle will help- only once you start adding brakes that don't "belong" to the hydraulic design you choose to use do you need to start looking at adjustable proportioning valves and the like (which do work but are an added complexity). Use someone else's money and research and testing to your advantage.

    Phil
     
    Ned Ludd and Roothawg like this.
  21. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 55,940

    squirrel
    Member

    Here we go, trying to overcomplicate things.......
     
    Moriarity, F-ONE and 57 Fargo like this.
  22. PhilA
    Joined: Sep 6, 2018
    Posts: 2,061

    PhilA
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    1. Hydro Tech

    In a lot of words, I was trying to say "keep it simple".

    Just in a lot of words.
     
    Roothawg and squirrel like this.
  23. I recollect my crazy uncle, Hank, back in the early 1950s, doing something to split the rear brakes so he had "dial-a-traction" on lake effect ice and snow so he could get to work in the next county. I never rode in the car or saw his handiwork but I think he was talking about "2 brake pedals". I was about 12 years old-ish and had no clue how anything worked so don't ax me. :confused:
    This was my dad's brother-in-law so it was a different gene pool...... the same uncle who checked a Mexican Jumping Bean with a meter and was sure he detected some voltage, instead of cracking the bean open and seeing the grub with his own eyes. And he was convinced that he killed cancer with whisky, so he had that going for him. :rolleyes:
     
    Roothawg likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.