<VV> Fwd: Corvair content, Really! (brakes)

[Bill Hubbell]

I am still not convinced. Again, the argument being given to add a redundant system is to protect against potential failure in another system. The proper "fix" for potential rear bearing failure is to replace any suspect bearing, not to add additional complexity "just in case".  Adding redundant systems solely for the reason you mention is just as likely to lull the owner into ignoring the future maintenance of the braking or bearing systems.  

Of course, we now have a generation or more of folks who have grown up expecting other people to protect them from all of life's possible harms so I suppose this kind of thinking is now to be expected. 

Bill Hubbell


On Mar 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Ken Pepke <kenpepke at juno.com> wrote:

> 
> It is time to remember the original reason for putting a dual M/C on an EARLY has nothing to do with brake failure ... it is because of rear wheel bearing failure.  And these bearings do fail.  Usually they start to grind, crunch, and growl early enough to get the car stopped before the axle leaves the differential and before the drum goes beyond the shoes.  They have been known to fail completely and instantly during a turn.  And once in a while they give no warning whatsoever.
> 
> When this happens you have NO brakes, NO emergency / parking brake, and downshifting has NO effect.  
> 
> I learned about this from a fellow at an early Chicago convention.  He had learned it the hard way on a long downhill road.  Upon returning home I immediately pulled a dual M/C complete assembly off a rusted out 67 Sport Sedan.  I re-plumbed the 63's system and ended up with a high, very hard pedal.  It took forever to get that slide valve centered ... then the pedal was normal.  Today, I have come to believe that was not the original system on the 67.  It would seem Corvair dual M/Cs did not have a slide valve.  Were I to do that job again, I would find a slide valve.  
> Ken P    
> 
> -----------------
> 
>> From: William Hubbell <whubbell at verizon.net>
>> Date: March 23, 2011 2:02:18 PM EDT
>> To: Bryan Blackwell <bryan at skiblack.com>
>> Cc: Virtual Vairs <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
>> Subject: Re: <VV> Corvair content, Really! (brakes)
>> 
>> Two dual m/c converted failures in 20 years?  I have NEVER had a failure in a stock Single m/c system.  I'm not saying it can't happen, but I think if you do your due diligence maintaining your brakes it is unlikely.  The way I look at it, a dual m/c system just has more things that can go wrong.  Besides, I think the best safety equipment is the nut behind the wheel, and the more you insulate that nut from the possible consequences of his actions (by installing ever more "safety" equipment), the greater the chance that "nut" will fail to do his job.
>> 
>> Of course, now they are putting large touch screens in the dash to further distract the driver.....
>> 
>> Bill Hubbell
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> Groupon&#8482 Official Site
> 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city&#39;s best!
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4d8a6a59537762ff53fst05duc
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
> Change your options: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs 
> _______________________________________________