<VV> Dual master cylinder

Thu Mar 24 17:02:14 EDT 2011

I confess to being a poopyhead, but on this point, I have valid reasoning.

The simple fact is that far and away the majority of "brake failures" have
nothing to do with the braking equipment (single or master cylinder) but
rather with the brake operator.  So long as people continue to drive too
fast for conditions, follow too closely, or simply DUI (I = fatigue, drugs,
alcohol, or distraction [phones/texting/talking/eating/putting on make-up,
etc.]), there will continue to be braking failures.  The odds of having an
accident because of an actual mechanical failure in any braking system
simply do not compare to the odds of an accident due to operator error.  My
point is, and always has been, that too much emphasis is put on improving
the safety equipment of the automobile, and not nearly enough emphasis is
place on operator training and responsibility.  All the safety systems in
the world will not protect you from your failure to use the device properly.
However, the emergence of these multiple safety systems seems to have
coincided with a decrease in operator responsibility and training.  I have
no doubt that today's cars are inherently "safer" that yesterday's cars, but
today's drivers are far more distracted and therefore more dangerous.

When I drive my 1964 Corvair with its single master cylinder, one-piece
steering shaft, direct-air heater, swing-axle suspension, mechanical points
ignition system, and T3 incandescent headlights, I am a completely different
driver than when I drive my 2007 Honda Civic Hybrid.  When I drive the stock
Corvair, I KNOW that I could be impaled by that "spear of death", or that
with a single broken line lose my brakes, or that my wheels "might" fall off
IF I am stupid enough to not check everything out and keep it in working
order AND drive like a modern idiot - so I don't do that.  I don't drive my
Corvair unless it is ready to be driven, and I drive with a different sense
of the world around me.  I do enjoy the experience of "stepping back in
time" when I drive the 1964, savoring life the way it used to be, with all
its warts and dangers.  I certainly do not want to have an accident in my
Corvair - it is priceless to me and irreplaceable in my mind, so I protect
it, and it protects me.  That doesn't mean I don't sometimes drive it fast
and hard, but I do so sensibly and responsibly.

Yes, our Corvairs ARE 40-50 years old, and parts CAN fail.  I presume that
those of you installing dual master cylinders in your cars are aware of this
as well, so I hope you would also be replacing brake lines, hoses,
cylinders, and other parts as I did when I rebuilt my car with a STOCK
single master cylinder system.  The Hard-Harder test is a fail-safe for
those of you who like to take shortcuts.

At best, the dual master cylinder is like an insurance policy - you hope to
god you never have to use it, but you WILL have to use brakes on your car
every day.  We all agree that EVERY car should have a mechanically sound and
properly functioning braking system, so regardless of which type of master
cylinder you prefer, please remember to inspect, repair, and maintain the
PRIMARY components of your braking system, and most important, be a safe and
fully engaged driver.

Bill Hubbell

-----Original Message-----
From: virtualvairs-bounces at corvair.org
[mailto:virtualvairs-bounces at corvair.org] On Behalf Of Sethracer at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 11:16 AM
To: bryan at skiblack.com; whubbell at verizon.net
Cc: virtualvairs at corvair.org
Subject: <VV> Dual master cylinder

In a message dated 3/24/2011 5:44:23 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
bryan at skiblack.com writes:

"No,  *you're* a poopyhead!" :-)   
Then Bill wrote back:

So how  do you decide how much redundancy is "enough"?  If dual m/c is 
safer than  single m/c, shouldn't we all want quad m/c because that would be

safer still?  But them what if that fails?  Maybe each wheel should have
dual 
lines and  wheel cylinders, "just in case".  

Better yet, install giant  airbags and rubber bumpers on the front and rear 
of all cars and have a backup  parachute "just in case". It couldn't hurt 
to install rocket-powered ejection  seats either.

Better yet, just make it illegal to drive faster than 10  mph!

Bill Hubbell

Well, Bill - Now we know who the "Poopyhead" is.  <grin> Unlike most of 
you, I guess, I actually had an accident where  a dual master cylinder would

have saved my car from hitting a fire hydrant. The  brake line on my 1955 
Chevy ran down the right side frame rail. When the  pressure plate pieces
hit it 
(Don't ask!) it sliced through it and removed  all remaining braking. 
(Prior to that point, the engine became permanently  disconnected from the
rest 
of the drive train.) A functioning emergency brake  might have stopped the 
car, had there been one. It is hard to comprehend  how fast 25 MPH feels
when 
you have absolutely no way to slow down the car. My  choices were limited 
to: 6 foot in diameter eucalyptus trees, the rear  bumper of a car stopped
at 
up-coming stop sign, the stop sign itself, with  a telephone pole about 6 
inches to the right of it, and finally, the  space between the car and the 
stop sign. I chose the space and traveled  across the intersection, missing
the 
stopped car, the crossing car and the stop  sign, and then stuck my right 
front wheel into the said fire  hydrant. Was it my fault? Absolutely yes.
But 
a dual master  cylinder would have placed me on the side of the street, 
with a couple of  holes in the floor, a small hole in the oil pan (nothing 
leaving, just bouncing  parts) and a lot  of pain in my right foot, a much 
smarter teenager. But without the  crash. Our Corvairs are at least 40 years
old, 
and internal corrosion,  neither visible from the outside nor "curable" via 
brake fluid replacement,  could result in a system hydraulic failure. That 
is why we do the hard-harder  brake test at every Corvair autocross. I have 
(personally) blown out two brake  systems at a Corsa autocross tech 
inspection. (not my cars) Both  drivers thanked me for it. (well, not
initially!) 
Better for it to  happen at the autocross inspection, than driving back to
the 
hotel when a  truck pulls out in front of you. As I recall, both drivers 
fixed the failed part  and drove in the Autocross. 

If you wish to have your car remain perfectly stock, so it can be shown in  
the "Really, Really, Really Stock" classification, I fully understand. You 
are  unlikely to have a major accident/failure pulling it off or back-onto 
the  trailer.  Otherwise .  .  .  .  .

Seth Emerson  

Seth Emerson

C's the Day! -  Corvair, Camaro, Corvette
San Jose, CA

 _______________________________________________
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 
 _______________________________________________