Jarl&CaroldeBoer wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> You're absolutely correct on that 45 percent circumference cut-out being
> an anti squeal device. I remember receiving a factory service bulletin
> in late MGA/MGB times, (around 1963) that strongly stressed the correct
> orientation. There was also a later one that warned of the dangers of
> "mix-and-match". Lockheed made the "improvement" to save money on that
> one machining step, but the notches work better / are quieter than the
> shims. I always just made a quick pass with the mill to "fix" the
> notchless pistons when I had them out for seal replacement. That took an
> extra 5 minutes and my customers appreciated the peace and quiet. Jarl
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
> KILE, PAUL D wrote:
> >
> > Paul H.,
> >
> > I believe the original purpose of the cutouts was to prevent brake
> > squeal. If so, it would make sense to me to orient the cutout toward
> > the trailing edge of the pad. This would have the effect of "toeing in"
Jarl, PaulK, thanks for the comments.
The last couple of sets of pads I have fitted didn't come with shims so I have
been transferring them from set to set. One of the BBSers seemed to be saying
that the shims should still be fitted with the pistons with cut-outs, but that
would seem to be 'belt and braces', comments?
Cheers both,
PaulH.
|