Messages

2nd Gen- 1970
Base Engine 3.8L 155 HP l6
?

Shouldn't the head rests be straight? And a real x77 with rear quarter trim?

Isn't the grill supposed to be silver?

Since this is an old thread you may want to start a new one.

Welcome to CRG John. I'm a big fan of buzzing on half a dozen. Can you show us some pics?

Now as  a complete engine listed on craig's list.

https://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/pts/5928962345.html

Jim,
Have you checked the bake pedal pushrod clearance? There should be a little brake pedal movement before pushrod engages booster. Also have you checked which hole is pedal pushrod in? Pushrod should be attached to the lower hole for power assist brakes.

Jim
Not sure how you verified booster to master cylinder pushrod length? Appears there are two different lengths and two different master cylinders with different depth pockets. The longer pushrod used with the shorter depth pocket mc will not allow piston to fully return to its stop.


http://www.camaros.net/forums/16-brakes-suspension-steering/158228-master-cylinder-push-rod-length.html

Hi Jim. In post #50. Is that some kind of adapter in master cylinder that the front line is screwed into?

Seems like you're unsure which wheel is locking up? I'd get a helper to watch from outside of car to verify which wheel is locking.

Jim. Here's an interesting read on disc converting.


http://www.pozziracing.com/brakes.htm#Converting_Drums_to_Discs

Is your mc correct for your car? Does it have the correct piston diameter? MC could be defective? Trash in mc or lines?

First off, I appreciate all of the replies and thoughts on this.

It is going to be a while before this car is actually running on the street so no matter which way I go, I wouldn't know the results for a while.

So now my question is......if rear wheel cylinders were redesigned with cup expanders starting in 1970 eliminating the need for the RPVs.......when you order new wheel cylinders for a 1968 car, what are you getting? The original 1968 design which would mean you still need an RPV......or an updated design meaning you would not?

And if all replacements wheel cylinders were updated, then what happens when you install the updated design (not requiring an RPV) on a car that still has it's original master cylinder that has an RPV. Could that push the brake shoes out too far? Those are just the thoughts running through my head.

This seems to be one of those many subjects where there are two distinct camps. I went through it with silicone vs regular brake fluid and stainless vs regular steel brake lines. In this case we have the folks who have no RPV and have great brakes......and we have the folks who had had poor braking, found out they didn't have an RPV and installed one, and had a great improvement in their braking......It makes it hard to make a good decision on which way to go.

Dave

I'm getting ready to purchase parts to repair the brakes on my '68. It has a '72 Ventura rear end. Checked on O'Reilly site. 68 & 72 show same part number. So if I get a mc without the rvp's it should be same '72 factory setup. IMO that last Chevelle post sure does make the most sense.


http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/detail/BHH1/WC45873/01324.oap?year=1972&make=Pontiac&model=Ventura&vi=5146760&ck=Search_01324_5146760_1225&pt=01324&ppt=C0066#compatibilityTab_

My sidecover is 3911947.

I think you changed the page for the side cover?

http://www.camaros.org/drivetrain.shtml