News:

Due to a technical issue, some recently uploaded pictures have been lost. We are investigating why this happened but the issue has been resolved so that future uploads should be safe.  You can also Modify your post (MORE...) and re-upload the pictures in your post.

Main Menu

1964 Brakes Dual Master Cylinder

Started by Scott Halver, November 26, 2014, 03:46:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Scott Halver

Does anyone know if the 1962 brake box (mounted on frame under master cyl, splits line to the two front brakes)  is the same as on a 1963-64 Cadillac?   (don't have '63-'64 parts car)
Does anyone know if the 1964 dual master cylinder does the "metering" ?    so I just need to run fluid lines.........

I'm putting a 1963-64 brake booster and dual master cylinder (rebuilt booster, new master cyl) on my 1960 Cadillac............   Cadillac parts guy assuring me that the booster will bolt on with the same linkage as the 1960.  I could use a 1962 dual master cyl but you cannot buy them new anymore and the rebuild is getting very tough-   $400 for an unknown rebuilt on Craig's List.   1962 was the first year for dual master cylinders, 1963-64 was upgraded per my understanding (can still buy a new '64 dual master cyl, $75-$80).   I don't want to change the factory, but the brakes have GONE OUT twice on this car while being driven.   This would be my only modification from factory.

Thinking of running the rear piston to the front brakes through the '62 splitter box and then the front piston to the rear brakes-   connect with existing line.   I would delete the current "splitter box" on the 1960 frame-   bolt 1962 box in the same hole.   SHalver #24920     
1960 Eldorado Seville, Grandfather Bought New
1970 Corvette Convertible 350/350

dplotkin

#1
My best and sincere advice to you is as follows:

The 1960 braking system is perfectly adequate when in manufacturers specs. There is nothing to be gained by moving to a later system except for the dual circuit aspect in which I'm in complete agreement as to safety. But enhanced safety is really all you will achieve and at the expense of hassle and expense adapting a booster & cylinder to a firewall and pedal linkage not designed for it.

Your brakes have "gone out" because of one or more failures having to do with worn or failed components and not any design or manufacturing defects intrinsic to the 60 car.

I have a 60 Buick with effectively the same hydraulics, I rebuilt everything, booster, cylinder, and all 4 wheel cylinders, used a power bleeder and a friend smarter than myself. The brakes are all the brakes that car needs. Of course as a Buick it has vastly superior 12" finned aluminum drums all around with wide shoes but the juice side uses the same parts.

So why not spend the same money rebuilding your correct parts with a gold standard guy, someone like Ed Strain from Florida, as you would to put together a mongrel system for the sake of 2 circuits. If the system is brand new, all the rubber lines, all cylinders and the booster, the shoes and hardware-you have little to worry about. I have 8 cars, all but one has its correct and original braking systems that have been gone through as above.

If originality doesn't matter I would spend my brake money on disks and up to date components and get more brakes rather than just more hydraulic fail-safe. . 

Dan
56 Fleetwood Sixty Special (Starlight silver over Dawn Grey)
60 Buick Electra six window
60 Chrysler 300 F Coupe
61 Plymouth Savoy Ram Inducted 413 Superstock
62 Pontiac Bonneville Vista
63 Chevy Impala convertable
63 Ford Galaxie XL fastback
65 Corvette convertable 396
68 Chrysler New Yorker

gary griffin

Dan,

   I have added dual cylinder masters to my 1940 LaSalle and my 1942 Cadillac and so far I am happy with everything. Art Gardner was selling kits which worked great on the 42 but had to be modified for the LaSalle.  My concern was the quality of brake components available today. NOS is too old for me and with the mix of foreign and unknown suppliers I feel more comfortable with a dual master cylinder. I have also had a couple of failures in the past.

    I just purchased a 1957-60 Special and am trying to decide if I can convert it safely and reasonable economically also.

   In 1968 I was backing a boat trailer into Puget Sound and had a wheel cylinder failure and thought I was losing my pregnant wife.  The car was only 6 years old.

    If feasible I will always be driving a car with dual master cylinder.
Gary Griffin

1940 LaSalle 5029 4 door convertible sedan
1942 Cadillac 6719 restoration almost complete?
1957 Cadillac 60-special (Needs a little TLC)
2013 Cadillac XTS daily driver

russ austin

The 62 - 64 T fitting is the same part #.  Go for it. 
R.Austin

Scott Halver

Hello R Austin,  Thank you for replying to let me know that the '62 T Block (split brake fluid lines) is the same for '63 and '64.  This message forum is so great!   SHalver #24920
1960 Eldorado Seville, Grandfather Bought New
1970 Corvette Convertible 350/350