In <199504251607.LAA04894@vuse.vanderbilt.edu>, Allen Bachelder wrote:
>
>>Check your rebuilt m/c. If it has been sleeved, I strongly urge that
>>you avoid silicon.
>> A. B. "I've been there" Bonds
>
>Thanks - and now that brings up another question - at least for future
>reference: how valuable is it to get M/Cs and W/Cs brass sleeved? On
>stored cars vs driven cars? With DOT 3, DOT 4 or DOT 5? Do we need a
>four-dimensional matrix to answer all these questions?
>
There is a lot of debate regarding sleeving. White Post insists brass
is best, other suppliers do it in stainless. The argument is that
while stainless is less susceptible to corrosion, it is not as "slick"
as brass and there may be problems with cylinders returning to rest
position. I cannot comment on that.
Sleeving is required when the original surface gets chewed up, usually
by corrosive pitting, sometimes by wear. It is absolutely required
when no new stock is available, but is generally considered second
best compared to renewal. It is not cheap. The dual m/c of the A
cost $100, White Post quotes $50 per cylinder on m/c's and $40 per
cylinder on wheel cylinders. Stainless sleeving is about the same
price. In my case it was less expensive than buying a rebuilt m/c.
Note that many rebuilt m/c's have been bored out and have non-standard
seals, which complicates matters when trying to rebuild them down the
road. In the case of most post-war MG's, new wheel cylinders are
still readily available and fairly inexpensive, so sleeving is not
worth considering there. I wouldn't do it to "make it better". The
original designs work just fine if they are not allowed to corrode.
Changing your fluid every year or two will prevent that.
A. B. "I hate brake fluid" Bonds
|