Great news Ken, projects moving now.

Either Nickey Chicago or ASSC Racing.......

Ken

Brake Proportioning
 

Curious, you went through the trouble of yanking the inner fender well out so as to rework the brake lines. Is there any particular reason why you didn't take the opportunity to ditch the non adjustable OE block style proportioning valve and install a knob or lever type of inline proportioning valve to allow full adjustment of your front to rear brake bias?

With any modified vehicle, it is critically important to be able to adjust your front to rear bias to insure proper braking actions, regardless of whether it is a disc / drum or disc / disc system. Even changes in tires, springs, shocks, and suspension require retuning the brake bias to achieve safe, full, well rounded, thoroughly tested braking performance. As with most muscle cars, there is typically a sizeable increase of the amount of rubber in the rear, where you now have much more traction to work with. Since there is more traction in the rear, you can usually up tune the amount of rear braking activity. If you have too much front brake activity and not enough rear brake activity, the front wheels will lock before the rear brakes come up to pressure resulting in a loss of ability to steer the vehicle. Conversely, over active rear braking will cause the tail end of the vehicle to come around on you during hard braking. The installation of a hydroboost system, especially along with upscale front brakes, can produce such incredible amounts of braking power that chassis weight shift during harsh stops brings a complete change to the vehicle's proportioning needs. Most all adjustable proportioning valves are capable of dialing back up to 57% of rear brake activity, or adjust all the way up to 100% full pressure to the rear brakes. Note that all scenarios, regardless of the type of proportioning, always allow full power to the front brakes.

Leaving a block style combination / proportioning valve in place means that you have to take what you get for results, whether they happen to be in the ball park or not. This to me is like the installation of a carburetor and / or fuel injection system, along with a distributor that has zero adjustment, and then hoping the engine runs right. I can't imagine anybody accepting that, yet so many people do about the same thing by not introducing an adjustable brake proportioning valve into their modified vehicles. Will it stop? Of course. But will it stop safely and predictably in the shortest possible distance from speed? Maybe you will get lucky to find the preset proportioning is in the basic ball park. If not, you may have to yank that fender well back out and rework the brake lines again to make the change to an adjustable arrangement. If you do end up having to do that, at least it will also look considerably cleaner with that block removed from under the master cylinder.

Again, just curious, as it struck me odd to see you go through all the trouble of reworking the brake lines, yet leaving the block in place.

It's not a stock proportioning valve....... It's set-up for 4 wheels disc brakes....

Ken

Brake proportioning
 

FYI - I understand that it is a disc / disc combination valve you have there. It may have been in the zone for your previous combo as part of a matched braking package, but it is going to be a crap shoot now as to how it handles the changes to the new front disc upgrade, along with now being hydroboost powered. Here is the statement in the Wilwood instructions from the brake kit you installed:

http://www.hydratechbraking.com/images/BRAKEBIAS.JPG

Most disc / disc block style proportioning blocks like you have limit back pressures to the rear brakes too much, as the engineering inside of them are purposely designed that way to make sure the rear end doesn't possibly come around on you during strong braking. The problem is that they are always detuned to the point of having the rear brakes do approximately 20-25% less than what they really should be doing, especially if you have good amount of tire size back there. The idea behind that thinking is that it is considered less dangerous for your front brakes to lock up before the rear brakes would. With this internal preset tuning, you essentially lose your ability to steer the vehicle with the front brakes locked up, but at least the rear of the vehicle doesn't try to come around on you. That's how these are calibrated. In a matched set of brakes front / rear, this may end up being somewhat in the zone, but now you have changed that by putting stronger front brakes into the scenario, but did not put the matching set of Wilwood brakes in the rear. Having a matched set of front and rear brakes provides the initial proper front to rear balance by providing appropriately sized caliper pistons, pad compounds, and rotor diameters. Mixing brake combos of new upscale brakes up front while retaining the old rear discs from a different package screws this balance completely up. The reality is that this now results in the rear brakes actually doing even less than they used to, and now there is nothing you can do about it save for following up with the installation of considerably more aggressive pad compounds in the rear, swapping in calipers with larger piston sizes, or ideally following up with an upgrade to the Wilwood specified matching rear brake kit. That's why an adjustable proportioning valve should have been installed instead of retaining the non adjustable block style proportioning valve, as you could have simply tweaked the setting around to adjust for the mismatch of front to rear brakes you now currently have. Having the front to rear brake bias tuned in just right is typically worth about 25 feet less stopping distance from 70 MPH, which can be the difference between smashing your car or not.

Next, take a look at this image of your front brake kit:

http://www.hydratechbraking.com/imag...OOD6PISTON.JPG

What you see is a machined rotor in this image. This isn't stated in the instructions other than to say this brake kit is to be installed by a person qualified, experienced, and competent in the installation and maintenance of disc brakes. That very wide and general statement doesn't specifically say this, but the image shows what it should look like once installed. What am I referring to? 2 piece rotor designs will always have some run out, even if the bolts are very carefully torqued in proper sequence. This means that the rotors need to be put onto a brake lathe and a light cut be performed to insure that any runout is removed before final installation, especially in scenarios like this brake package that have fixed / non floating caliper designs. I have never seen a two piece rotor design that has zero runout in it, typically having to machine off anywhere from 15-25 thousandths to get them trued to prevent brake pulsation. A person qualified, experienced, and competent in the installation and maintenance of disc brakes knows that these rotors must be machined before road use is attempted.

Additionally, and very importantly, while that black coating on your rotors may look cool, it really is a pestilence if not machined off of the friction areas before road use. If this coating is not removed, the pads will have to wear through it, initially causing the braking to be WAY grabby and overly aggressive. We get tech calls from customers complaining that their braking actions are undriveable - like an ON / OFF switch being too grabby to drive. We ask them if their brakes at the wheels are brand new, and if the rotors are coated, and they always say yes. We then inform them that this coating was to be machined off prior to running the brakes, and that this coating is now leaving unwanted deposits on the brake pads which leads to grabbing, along with heavy brake pulsation until all of the coating is worn off by the pads. The bad news there is that the coating doesn't wear off evenly, smearing around leaving a considerable amount of TV (thickness variation). When this is happening, you will see uneven patches of black and silver on the rotor friction areas. Some get lucky by taking the vehicle out for a heavy pound session to wear off the coating, but most end up having to pull their rotors back off and have them machined. When this happens, we also recommend the pads have a few thousandths milled off of the friction areas to remove the burnished in coating out of them, or replace the pad set entirely...

:rolleyes:

Thanks for your advice......If there is an issue I will definitely take your advice and change things around !!!!!


Ken

Got the car finished and took it to ASSC for tuning........ Need to get the front end aligned, get the A/C system charged and it seems the steering box has a slight leak...... Might need to replace it...... Just about there.... Brakes are Awsum......

https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...080&fit=bounds
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...080&fit=bounds

Very nice and congrats on getting it finished. Very classy looking and well done!!

Congratulations getin her done! That's a nice looking car. let us know how the tune goes.

Got the car back from Larry at ASSC today...... After tuning it made basically 398 H.P and 394 ft pounds of torque........Perfect balance ........ Front end alignment, A/C system recharged and new Tires next week
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...080&fit=bounds
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...080&fit=bounds
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...080&fit=bounds

Nice numbers, plenty of power to make it a fun ride. Glad it all went well. Nice job Ken.

Lookin Good ! :)
 

So it looks like you dodged a bullet in the brake balance department so far? Feels well balanced? I had been giving your scenario some thought, and if your front brakes seem to powerful compared to the rear (once you have put a few hundred miles on it), you could leave the proportioning block you have in place, then swap in some harder pads up front, or alternately some pads with more bite in the rear as a tuning mod (only if needed). From what you are saying, you have gotten lucky as it must be in the ball park. The harder you stop, the more weight shifts off of the rear tires and onto the front tires, so in this case it looks like a win. Pulling that fenderwell back out and replumbing for an adjustable prop valve looks like it won't be needed - bonus!

Build looks great - proud to have our system in there to bring all of those ponies back down easily with a quickness as needed.
That way you can get more rowdy with it! :cheers:



:thumbsup:

The car stops like an Indy Car....... Brakes are awsum !!!!!!!

Need some opinions on how to correct a minor issue......I replaced the power steering box in the car due to a little leaking issue (12.7 to 1 Lee box) and replaced it with a 12.7 Borgeson box........ Leak gone..... But the box is effortless while driving the car..... No road feel at all..... So...with the hydraboost in the system what would be the best way to reduce the Volume/Pressue slightly to the box without compromising the system.......Options are to put a Height's flow control valve to the box or a reducer fitting in the power steering pump (Turn one 3 gal per minute 1500 psi)......

Thanks

Ken

I would call Turn One. I bet they will have a solution for you.

Andrew

Talked to Turn One today and found out that it's not that simple of a problem to balance out........ The original box was fine just had a leak..... Seems the best/easiest way to get what I want is to get the Lee box rebuilt and put it back in as it is balanced with the rest of the system pretty good and had the road feel that seems normal....... Live and learn....

Ken

Well, at least you have a solution. As always, there is a chain of cause and effect when changing parts around. That's hotrodding!

Andrew

I would still try a flow reducer, or pressure reducer kit.

https://www.borgeson.com/xcart/produ...cat=133&page=1

Steering feel
 

Contrary to what most everybody thinks, pressure and volume can be adjusted around to help a bit, but the actual steering feel or firmness is dictated by the input shaft of the steering gear. It looks like just a solid splined steel shaft, though it is actually a torsion bar, meaning it will flex under twisting load. The stiffer the torsion bar / input shaft is, the firmer the steering response will be and vice versa. Yes, some tuning can always be accomplished externally, though this is a classic case where the actual steering gear is where the difference is. There were no changes made to pump flow or max relief pressure, yet the replacement steering gear has no feel to it compared to the Lee prepared box.

Yes, you could play around with all different kinds of PS system tuning, though it sounds to me like you would ultimately be vastly happier to have the Lee prepared box freshened up and put back into service. I say drive it with the Borgeson box until the Lee box comes back, then re-install the Lee box and live happy. I am sure there are plenty of people out there that would gladly take the Borgeson box off of your hands after you are done with it.

Here is a lot of good reading
 

https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/...droboost-setup

:cheers:

Original Lee Eng Box is out for rebuild.......

Couple of minor issues...... Called Turn one about a couple of things..... #1 the pump was making a whirring sound and they explained to me that I had the Gravity feed line to the pump not in the optimum situation and the reservoir tank I was using didn't have flow diverters on the return lines inside the unit.....Bought a Concept One tank with those features and mounted the tank higher with a straight feed line to the pump....... Bingo..... Noise gone..... Turn one also rebuilt the Lee Steering box and everything is back to normal with great road feel........ Learn something every day.....

Ken

Great to hear :)
 

Great to hear that you have the Lee box freshened back up and have also chased out the PS pump noise - hooray! Check that off the list now with a smile.

Ok, soap box time now: It absolutely astounds me after 21 years of owning / operating Hydratech that the aftermarket is still peddling PS reservoirs that are nothing more than a holding tank with zero regards to proper internal engineering. This is fine as a coolant overflow tank, but most definitely not acceptable for power steering use. The PS pump is to be fed a steady supply of calm de-aerated fluid right? This requires a PS reservoir to be more than just a can with some input / output fittings in it. If you think about it, a PS pump is a vane style pump that acts much like a turbine in its operations. Now take and run a high RPM spirited blast with the vehicle and it has the same net effect as putting a quart of PS fluid in a blender and hitting puree. This "agitated" fluid returns back to the PS reservoir, where it must be allowed as much "fluid dwell time" as possible before being sucked back into the PS pump again. This requires careful design to divert returning fluid away from the suction / feed / output port of the reservoir. Spoken the other way around for the sake of clarity, the fluid needs a moment to allow any aeration / foaming to float to the top and dissipate before being fed back to the PS pump. I will not "name names", but some of the larger highly vaunted companies out there produce these very good looking reservoirs, BUT zero - zip - zilch internal engineering, just a storage can. This then of course leads to PS system noise, possibly even failure, as aerated PS fluid will chatter the PS pump vanes leading to pump damage. One company even states that its PS pump is not compatible with hydroboost, when actually it is only a cover up for their poorly designed remote reservoir. Take this same company's front drive arrangement, remove their remote reservoir and replace it with say a Turn One or other properly designed reservoir and Presto! The system now runs just fine - go figure. They know it, but they aren't willing to do anything to improve their design. It sure is a shame to remove such a good looking reservoir from their front drive arrangement, but it just doesn't work properly.

Without going too far into PS reservoir design nuances, you really need two things:

Capacity, so that the returning fluid has a moment to dissipate any aeration (referred to as fluid dwell time). Would you put a 3 quart oil pan on your engine - um, no. Most all automotive enthusiasts know that you would instead install an oil pan with increased capacity. Same goes for the PS reservoir - the more capacity, the longer the fluid dwell time before it gets fed back into the PS pump.

Baffling, so that returning fluid is taken to the farthest possible point of the reservoir before being sucked back into the PS pump. This simply gives any aeration a chance to rise to the top. Even a standard engine oil pan still makes a good basic comparison, as it has some internal baffling to keep "windage whipped" oil from getting to the oil pump pickup before it has a chance to calm down a bit.

So when looking at a PS reservoir for your build, you can count on most OEM style PS pump reservoirs to have "million dollar engineering" behind what may just look like a basic holding tank. Take a look inside or cut one open and you will see baffling and flow diverters strategically placed. You will usually be fine running a factory pump with a matched reservoir. If looking at an aftermarket reservoir, make sure it has ample capacity and proper technology inside of it. Ken's whirring pump noise would have had most chasing the pump around, when it actually wan't the pump's fault at all, instead being the reservoir feeding it. One other point of mention is that most all OEM remote reservoirs have an average of a 5/8" inner diameter feed to the pump. -8 AN is a major culprit here, as the inner diameter is woefully inadequate, so make certain that you are looking at -10 AN. Even then, you may have to run some of these -10 adapters and fittings we have seen through a drill press if possible if you see the inner diameters are bottlenecked down too small. Last, but not least, you want to keep your distance between a remote reservoir and the pump as short and as straight as possible. Every harsh turn a fluid of most any sort takes is a restriction to flow...

Ok, of my soap box now! We just get sooooo many tech calls regarding this...

:lateral:

Thanks for supplying Technical info that most of us wouldn't have a clue about....... Thanks again !!!!

Ken

A little update...... After the LS transplant and installing all the Dakota Digital products ...... the car was Awsum....Chris took the car on the Hot Rod Power tour...... Driving to Ohio for the start everything was perfect...Then during the middle of the week the car started having some issues.....He called and told me the Dakota dash had only half the gauges working and the cooling fans wouldn't run....... Hummm!!!!!!......This happened sporadically....Hummmm!!!!........ They ended up adding a manual switch to turn the fans on and he made it home .......I was thinking it was a Dakota digital issue...... LOL..... after getting the car into Frame-up and Donnie and his crew looked into the issue....... They found that the OBD splitter harness I added for the ease of Scanning if required was the problem..... The Harness was the issue....... They removed it and plugged the OBD plug from the GM harness directly into the Dakota module and everything is perfect again..... Just wanted to post this because it might help somebody in the future......

Ken

I have had issues on several builds due to the use of splitters. Some work and some don’t. The shorter ones that use ribbon cable or the ones without cable seem to work better.

I had one issue where the voltmeter wouldn’t work until I changed the bus address of the Dakota Digital BIM. You have four options for bus address in the BIM.

I spent some time looking to see if anyone made a bus buffer or expander without success.

Don

Thanks for the heads up, I was thinking of using one .

I have had good luck with this splitter

https://www.ebay.com/itm/333415688554



Don

dhutton, you're an EE right?

I was under the impression that the signal couldn't be split and that the issue wasn't the splitter so much as the splitting of the signal. I tried a couple of splitters when the BIM modules first came out and was less than successful so I have always avoided them as a rule.

If you got tech to impart, I am interested. Thanks!

Hi Donny. Ya retired EE. Well I have a couple of theories. With the long cables on the splitters there can be significant delayed reflections of the signals (caused by impedance mismatches) that can distort the signal. With the short lengths of the above splitter the reflections do not cause distortion. The other possibility is that the added capacitance of the cables is loading the signal but that seems less likely.

To be honest I haven’t been motivated enough to dust off my oscilloscope and look at the waveforms with and without the splitter.

Don