Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I seem to have run into a problem, or multiple problems with the brake lines for my '67 GTV. I ran new lines with all new hardware, matching flares and threads throughout. so far, so good (what idiot approved the non-uniform flares and fittings?). everything is hooked up, and all I need to do in order to go for my first drive is bleed the brakes. Simple.

problem is, the new lines leak. not one or two, all of the SAE flares. I decided my mechanic friend and I just did a bad job flaring all the ends. bummer. now the choice is to buy a really good Flaring tool from eastwood or FedHill, or run pre-flared lines with unions to get the right lengths (my choice). throw in some special adapters so I can switch from din flares to SAE, metric to sae threads, female sae to male sae. now everything is off-the-shelf, although I don't really like all the extra joints. just that many more places to leak. Snug it all up, and what happens? the leaks are still there. the front and rear Tees won't seal, even with the store-bought lines (read perfect flares). removed the tees to inspect, and ALL the flare seats are buggered. I decide to try and polish the seats with valve-lapping compound and a new brake line chucked into a drill. seems to work. Also found some 45 deg copper gaskets designed for sealing SAE flares. might help. while cleaning and inspecting the seats, I find a new problem, possibly the one that started it all. The new tube nuts are threaded all the way to the flare end of the nut. the original nuts are relieved (no threads) for the last 1/8" or so, and the brass T's are not threaded to the end. Looks like I even cut some new threads in tightening the nuts, and the ends of the nuts have rounded threads. appears to be a problem, probably kept the original flares from forming a good seal to the seat.

All the sources I have found for tube nuts show threads to the end of the nut. I'm thinking I will machine or file the last 2-3 threads off the current lines to get the flares to seat, Also looking at adapting a proportioning valve to distribute fluid (have to feed both circuits from the single line from my booster). Wilwood makes one for under $60 that looks promising.

I have a '73 gtv parts car that will eventually donate it's dual-circuit brakes to this car, but that's a job for another day.

Long-winded, but has anyone with comparable car had problems running new brake lines with new fittings, and how did you resolve the problems? Have I missed something more basic? Anyone have a good front and back tee for sale?
thanks in advance,
Stan
 

·
Premium Member
71 Berlina 74 GTV 17 Giulia Q4
Joined
·
6,550 Posts
I was going to start a new thread to pass on what I found but this seems like a good place. To make a long story short I needed a new brake line from the coupling at the front to the porportioning valve. I went to the local Aaxion store, they are a national brand, and they were most helpful. They carry a good brake line and were familiar with the type of flare on the ends. They made an exact copy of my old line with the 10x1 metric fittings and the correct flares all for $16.21 while I waited. I'd been dreading getting this fix and as it turns out it couldn't have been eaiser.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
BTDT on my '69 spider. My old flare nuts had previously been tightened to the point that they were flared out and wouldn't provide the compression required to seal the joint. I could find new flare nuts locally (even in BF Arkansas) but the threads on the end were not "relieved". I wound up filing off the threads as you suggested. Crude but it worked.

I'm almost positive that Fed-Hill has the correct flare nuts. Look a little closer at their website. I'm pretty sure Papajam had a thread also linking the correct part.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,145 Posts
I have a '73 gtv parts car that will eventually donate it's dual-circuit brakes to this car, but that's a job for another day.
Do you mean that you plan to convert a standing pedal car to hanging pedals? E.g., remove the underfloor pedal box from your '67, cut a hole in the firewall, and mount the '73 pedal assembly, booster, and master cylinders?

Personally, I think that's a really BAD idea. It will destroy the originality of your '67, and create a big job for the next owner. What's the benefit? If you really have to have dual circuit brakes and/or a hydraulic clutch, use '69 parts. Or just trade your '67 for a later car.

On your brake line fitting problem: Yea, just call the nice people at Fedhillusa ( http://fedhillusa.com/ ). They offer a variety of nuts. The key word is "non threaded lead".

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Jay,
I know the conversion to hanging pedals is polarizing. For now, I'm keeping my options open, as I have a 2l parts car for the crusher with useable parts to do the conversion. I've already put a spica 1750 engine in, with the requisite modifications to the fuel delivery system. Also plan to install the LSD and front spindles/brakes from the donor. obviously nothing irreversible in this. Not going to loose sleep over what the next buyer is looking for. Doesn't mean I won't listen, and doesn't mean I've made up my mind to do the conversion, but I'm willing to change things to suit me. I like a lot of the mods I've seen on the bb, especially like the one you did to get a low brake fluid warning light. that's one I'm planning on, and thanks for sharing it! Heck, I'm putting a flame paint-job on the hearse, that's going to ruffle the sensibilities of the pro-car crowd.
Stan
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,145 Posts
I like a lot of the mods I've seen on the bb, especially like the one you did to get a low brake fluid warning light. that's one I'm planning on, and thanks for sharing it!
Stan:

Sure, in the end it's your car, and you have the right to modify it any way you chose. And yes, while one of my arguements against irreverseable modification is the consideration of the next owner, who might favor originality, there are other reasons:

A second arguement favoring keeping the standing pedal / single circuit system is simply that it works pretty darned well. In fact, my mod of putting that float-switch-warning light to my brake reservoir was to add a bit more safety to my '66 Sprint's single circuit braking system, and avoid going to a dual circuit, which I consider to be overkill.

Modifications are fun to design and implement, but often they require more work than simply making the stock system work at 100%. I'd put the conversion to hanging pedals in that category.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
197 Posts
Not to stray too far off topic, but has anyone ever fitted a single circuit brake system with hydraulic fuses? That seems like it would prevent catastrophic failure, and coupled with a low hydraulic fluid warning light should offer a fair amount of protection.

Thanks,
Alex
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
Stan:


A second arguement favoring keeping the standing pedal / single circuit system is simply that it works pretty darned well. In fact, my mod of putting that float-switch-warning light to my brake reservoir was to add a bit more safety to my '66 Sprint's single circuit braking system, and avoid going to a dual circuit, which I consider to be overkill.
QUOTE]

Jay, this is the most compelling argument, and may decide the issue for me.

My '59 and '61 hearses both have single-circuit MC's. that's 6000 lbs and 22 ft on drum brakes (boosted). I drove the '61 to my wedding 4 years ago. when I went out the next day to drive it back to the shop, the pedal went to the floor. No fluid. Dodged a bullet on the wedding day!
btw, there's an off-the-shelf upgrade to dual-circuit MC on the caddies, costs under $100.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
567 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
And one of my wife. She's a real sport!
 

Attachments

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,145 Posts
My '59 and '61 hearses both have single-circuit MC's. that's 6000 lbs and 22 ft on drum brakes (boosted). I drove the '61 to my wedding 4 years ago. when I went out the next day to drive it back to the shop, the pedal went to the floor. No fluid. Dodged a bullet on the wedding day!
OK, here's another arguement against the hassle of installing dual circuit: If you lose the front circuit, you lose far more than 1/2 of your braking power. Sure, the car will stop eventually with just its rear brakes, but I wouldn't want to be the guy in front of that 6000# hearse!

I'll bet with the incident you describe, the fluid was slowly dropping over time. A float-switch-light would have alterted you to the problem and you could have added fluid. In my mind, even with the slow leak, that would be a better situation than having a dual circuit system that unexpectedly loses its front circuit.

btw, there's an off-the-shelf upgrade to dual-circuit MC on the caddies, costs under $100.
I'm guessing that the $100 upgrade is just a dual-circuit MC, and that some plumbing is also required to complete the conversion. Not trying to talk you out of it, but budget another few bucks and some time bending and fitting rigid lines.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,232 Posts
Sure, the car will stop eventually with just its rear brakes, but I wouldn't want to be the guy in front of that 6000# hearse!
Imagine then being the guy in front if the hearse had ZERO brakes!

Sorry, Jay. I'm not buying any arguments that tandem brakes are a hassle. The Feds mandated tandem brakes in 1968 for good reason.

But I will agree that a hanging pedal conversion is NOT the way to go for a tandem brakes installation on a 67. Dual circuit masters are available both new and rebuilt. And if going without boosters, 6 brakelines will be needed, the same number of brakelines in a single circuit boosted system.
I'll be doing this exact conversion in a few weeks. Anyone interested in a play by play?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
The dual circuit requirement came in 1968. But if you dig into the NHTSI data, you'll find that nearly all the brake failure events cited were correlated to non-maintained systems. Good maintenance, including regular replacement with the proper brake fluid will make either single or dual brakes equally safe.

From all the threads on this BB, the 69 Alfa dual system is seriously problematic. the seals for the warning light valve are unobtainable, so most of them now leak, making that system more dangerous rather than less. In addition, since it has several more mechanical components involving seals, the early dual cct system requires more maintenance than the single cct. Also, there are endless threads on the difficulties of properly bleeding the dual cct system, commonly resulting in mushy brakes.

Finally, the dual cct system used two of the hideously expensive and hard to repair brake boosters. Failure of the vacuum check valve - another irreplaceable part - leads to boost failure, a much more dangerous case than even fluid leaks. Check at IAP (or others) - the two repair kits are $300 PER BOOSTER.

If you really want a good dual cct brake system, just get the Tilton dual-master cylinder setup. Eliminated the troublesome rear brake limiting valve and has fully adjustable F/R balance (on-track adjustable with the right option). Most all the racers scrap the Alfa dual system and use this.

Robert
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,232 Posts
I respect that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but Robert, you are sooooo incorrect on soooooo many levels, I don't know where to begin. So I won't. Nor do I care to post a book here on the subject. If anyone would like to learn about the 69 tandem system, please send me a PM with your contact info. I'd be happy to share my knowledge and experience by phone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
papajam;977700... Robert said:
Not hard to do. Wouldn't even be the first time since breakfast.

One point I tried to make - a well maintained brake system will always be safer than a poorly maintained one. Or is that wrong too?

;)

Robert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,892 Posts
And all pre-dual brake system cars littered the street with random and sudden brake failure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
And all pre-dual brake system cars littered the street with random and sudden brake failure.
At leasts among the Alfa ATE single cct systems this was not true. I did see too many Fords and Chevys driving around with nearly empty brake reservoirs, but poor maintenance is poor maintenance, and the resulting failure is neither random or sudden, just a surprise to the clueless. If you changed the fluid every year and kept the seals in good condition you'd never have a problem.

[Even today, BMW requires new fluid at least every 24 months].

In the late 60's and early 70's, not a single racer I knew swapped the complexity of the '69 dual system for their existing single system. In all the races I won or lost, the only brake problem I ever had was one practice session that had the wrong brake fluid in the system - DOT 5(4?) fluid that hardened the OEM rubber MC seals overnight. Quite a thrash to rebuild the MC and four calipers overnight, and a quart or two of the right stuff to flush everything. The only other problem to watch for was getting too much heat from the exhaust pipes into the reservoir or lines, which took a heat shield and some insulation wrap.

Robert
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top