Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Wet\s+brakes\s+don\'t\s+work\,\s+Part\s+II\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Wet\s+brakes\s+don\'t\s+work\,\s+Part\s+II\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: "Paul Hunt" <paul.hunt1@virgin.net>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 16:31:11 +0100; GT wheel cylinders give *greater* braking effort to cope with the additional weight, that is why roadster backplates and wheel cylinders have different peg arrangements. PaulH. http://freespace.virgi; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00084.html (11,398 bytes)
2. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: "Paul Hunt" <paul.hunt1@virgin.net>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 16:34:55 +0100; This would cause excesssive pedal travel, not reduced braking effort (always assuming that the pedal travel wasn't so great that it hit the floor!). PaulH. http://freespace.virgin.net/paul.hunt1/ on; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00085.html (8,400 bytes)
3. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Rick Morrison <gofastmg@juno.com>; Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:26:33 EST; Actually no, Paul. GT cylinders, being slightly smaller in diameter, exert less force on the shoes, vs roadster cylinders. The reason for that was the additional 200 odd pounds more on the GT is abov; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00117.html (12,986 bytes)
4. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Bill Schooler <schooler@erols.com>; Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 20:15:51 -0500; Actually Rick, the GT cylinders are larger in diameter. But they do exert less force on the shoes. Bill; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00120.html (14,379 bytes)
5. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Florrie & Allen Bachelder <bachldrs@swva.net>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 22:12:47 -0400; Except GT cylinders are larger: .870 vs .800 for the Tourer. Allen; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00123.html (13,861 bytes)
6. RE: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Larry Hoy <larryhoy@cwix.com>; Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 22:19:26 -0700; ......so by installing the cylinder with the .870 bore you get less brake shoe travel for the same amount of brake pedal travel. This has the effect of putting greater emphasis on the front brakes. F; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00132.html (8,195 bytes)
7. FW: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Larry Hoy <larryhoy@cwix.com>; Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 12:49:12 -0700; Well folks, Barney being the gentleman he is, responded to me personally about rear brake master cylinders message. I knew when I was writing it that I was a little out of my area of expertise but co; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00160.html (10,709 bytes)
8. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Rick Morrison <gofastmg@juno.com>; Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 23:12:26 EST; OK folks, I stepped in it big time. Without checking the source data, I took an article I had just read in an old issue of an English publication on competition modifications at face value. (the peri; /html/mgs/1999-04/msg00179.html (15,920 bytes)
9. Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: xyzabcde@earthlink.net; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:45:55 -0800; Hi again, 20 years ago, when I first discovered this problem (how could I miss it?) I was told that it was "the nature of the beast" so I suffered along. Since I was in Southern California, I didn't; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01715.html (10,689 bytes)
10. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Charley & Peggy Robinson <ccrobins@ktc.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:11:00 -0600; Hi Denise, Have you jacked up the front of the car and tested the front brakes to see how they work? Forgive me if I've missed something but all I've seen is conjecture. CR; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01729.html (7,130 bytes)
11. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: xyzabcde@earthlink.net; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:47:49 -0800; Hi Charley, The reason I haven't tested any part of the brake system at this point is that I have 20 years and 200K miles of driving data to work with. In that time, I've verified many times that all; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01746.html (8,929 bytes)
12. RE: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: "Dodd, Kelvin" <doddk@mossmotors.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:38:57 -0800; Just a thought, you might check the diameter of the rear wheel cylinders. It's possible replacements were installed that are the wrong diameter. Look at the rear of the backing plates to see if they; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01747.html (7,834 bytes)
13. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: REwald9535@aol.com; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 22:32:35 EST; This is just a thought but if the rear brakes were to be out of adjustment on a single master system it would take so much fluid to move the rear shoes, very little would be left over to run the fron; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01766.html (10,974 bytes)
14. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Bill Schooler <schooler@erols.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 07:26:02 -0500; I have always been amused by some of the "puffery" language used by VB in their catalog. "Upgraded" rear wheel cylinders are nothing more than the wheel cylinders for GTs. Different internal diamete; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01773.html (10,187 bytes)
15. Re: Wet brakes don't work, Part II (score: 1): Author: Skye Poier <skye@ffwd.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 16:19:15 -0800; An additional comment on this thread. When I first got my 66 'B, and drove it in heavy rain for long periods of time, it would take up to 4-5 seconds for the brakes to begin to "grab" and slow the ca; /html/mgs/1999-03/msg01826.html (7,740 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]