Fitting A New Brake System to a 1970 IIA 88

[JackIIA]

[Radio Edit]

[jac04]

3.) Flare Used is DOUBLE throughout the system. In instances where there is the old style of British Bubble Flare (different from the modern Bubble Flare), the DOUBLE flare should be substituted. An example of a LR Genuine Brake Pipe with this old Bubble Flare is #595465
Why would you substitute a double flare for a bubble flare? Where the bubble flares are used, the mating component has a 'female' taper for the 'male' bubble to fit into. If you purchase the lines from our hosts, they come with the correct bubble flares.



9.) With just a few exceptions, you should run your piping on top of the chassis frame, including all the way aft to the rear axle.
AFAIK, the factory routing for the lines was always against the inside of the frame rail. Why put the lines on top of the chassis where mud/debris collects? It also makes it difficult to get to the clips that hold the lines in place.

[thixon]

First off, I'm not making any recommendations to you on how to make brake lines, nor am I endorsing the making of brake lines by anyone other than a highly trained professional.:D

You can make something very close to a bubble flare using a double flaring tool. Use the flat side of the tool, and the arbor you'd use to make a double flare. Cut off you're brake pipe, debur, make sure its sqaure, and then insert the arbor, and crank it down in the tool. You end up with something very close to an original bubble flare.

http://fedhillusa.net/aboutus.aspx

This page may help you.

[JackIIA]

Jeff, Travis, thanks for the comments/advice.

Yes on the FedHill site. It's the site that put a lot of this into some semblance of order for me. They also will rent a solid double flaring tool if you buy pipe from them.

Why would you substitute a double flare for a bubble flare? Where the bubble flares are used, the mating component has a 'female' taper for the 'male' bubble to fit into. If you purchase the lines from our hosts, they come with the correct bubble flares.

I am running my own pipes, not RN ones, so all flares will have to be made. Doing so mostly because I want to switch to Copper-Nickel, rather than use steel. Thought about going with the Automec ones, but I’ve got a couple of weird quirks and I didn’t want to be tied to a specific length. I also will probably do fuel too. Plus, I think it’s interesting.

“AFAIK, the factory routing for the lines was always against the inside of the frame rail. Why put the lines on top of the chassis where mud/debris collects? It also makes it difficult to get to the clips that hold the lines in place.”

Is that true??? That seems like it would be easier. No worrying about clearance with body parts. The PO really messed with all things brakes. There is nothing original about my existing routing.

I mean NOTHING. It’s a bunch of spaghetti and rats nests and when he had some extra piping at the end of a run, he just made a silly straw rather than use the proper length piping. Depending on my mood, I either laugh or want to throttle the guy. Everything was a shortcut. So, I have no factory routing to reference. I know Terriann suggested factory routing is on top of the chassis. I don’t really care where it goes, as long as it doesn’t rub anything. I assumed the top of chassis must be right because of rocks, tree stumps, or whatever could theoretically kick up from the road. Which is it??

As far as the bubble vs double thing. I think the bubble ones have been superseded based on what I had read on Fed Hill:

“Notice that old British fittings use the obsolete SAE convex (bubble) flare with a 45
degree backside angle. Beginning in the '70's the DIN (bubble) flare with a 90 degree
backside angle was adopted. You can use the P10 with either the SAE/DIN bubble flare or SAE double flare. The DIN flare will work in older fittings that had the SAE convex flare form and eliminates the problem of the flare wedging the nut open causing you to curse as you try to remove your old brake lines. If you are re-using your original brake line nuts and are having difficulties in starting the nut into the fitting, examine the end of the nut carefully for swelling.”

OK. So does this mean you guys are signing off on all items but numbers 3 and 9? ;).

[thixon]

I don't have a problem with anything you said....including 3 or 9. Run the lines however you want to. Mine are on top of the frame for exactly the reasons you point out. If you do a good job running making them, you won't be servicing them again for a long, long time anyway. Its your truck, do it whatever way blows your skirt up.

As for the flare...well...I've seen guys do an an extra wide single flare w/ brit fittings before and make it work by torquing the crap out of the fitting. I'm saying you should do this, just that I've seen it work. Mine are done in the manner I suggested, and appear to be fine. I will say that if you rent the tool you reference, the job will go easier. That tool works way better than the standard double flaring tool that you can buy at any auto parts shop.

[jac04]

As far as the bubble vs double thing. I think the bubble ones have been superseded based on what I had read on Fed Hill:

They stated it was obsolete, not superceded. Big difference. In any case, you certainly should not substitute a double flare for a bubble flare - they are completely different animals. However, you should be able to use a DIN bubble flare in place of the original British SAE bubble flare (according to the FedHill info).

What is interesting is that OReilly's on-line shows a listing of brake lines supposedly for British vehicles. They state that they have an ISO bubble flare and the illustration shows the correct style bubble flare:
http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/search/Brake+Lines+(Steel)+-+Import/N0834/C0066.oap?page=1&sortBy=1&results=60

[SafeAirOne]

Are we saying that we're running the brake line along the top surface of the chassis or along the top portion of the inboard surface of the chassis?

If it's the top surface, are you threading the line through the rear tub supports? I think that'd be an colossal PITA when you eventually need to replace them later!

I can't think of an instance where debris has taken out any of my brake lines. Rust, sure. Overpressurization + rust, yup. Rusty wheel cyllinders, uh huh. Never debris though.

EDIT: Also, that 007 flaring tool (http://store.fedhillusa.com/flaringtools.aspx)at federal hill looks AWESOME! Watch the video--It takes me as long to clamp the tubing in my flaring tool as it takes them to make up a whole line!

Looks like a Sealey PFT/02 flairing tool--125 pounds if you order it from the UK...

[JackIIA]

I'm going to look into this abit more before pulling the trigger given the bubble issue. Thanks. Mark - I was thinking on top of the chassis, which is what Travis did. I think Jeff ran it along the inside of each chassis rail. I'd expect you wouldn't go through the tub supports. And yeah, that flaring tool sounds pretty good and is $380 to buy.

[SafeAirOne]

And yeah, that flaring tool sounds pretty good and is $380 to buy.

Not if you order it from the UK...

[JackIIA]

True. It would run you like $250 including shipping, visa tx fees, import fee. Still too much for me to justify, but would be nice to add to the peg board. :rolleyes:

[Tim Smith]

If you are debating the flare tool and looking for ways to justify it, I would rent it from you. :D

[SafeAirOne]

I was biefly thinking that it is a "must-have" tool, despite the fact that I haven't used my curret flaring tool in probably 5 years plus I already have copper-nickel brake lines, so they won't need replacing any time in the near future.

Still, what a great tool.

[JackIIA]

Well, with some more effort I determined that LR piping is a bit of a hodge podge of flaring.

On new LR labeled pipes I’ve found both DOUBLE and “SAE CONVEX” which is the bubble flare Jeff referenced. It has a 45 degree backside instead of the modern 90 degree backside on a DIN flare and is indeed still being made, or at least appears on some Proline pieces.

Some LR piping even has a double flare on one side and this older bubble flare on the other.

Given what I’ve learned, I'll be going with copper-nickel, double flaring throughout, using t-fittings instead of the PDWA, and top routing the piping. But...that summary wasn't bullet proof and I don’t want anyone driving off the road because they only read the first post!

Tim – If I ever buy that tool, I’ll be sure to PM you. No rental fee required. :thumb-up:

[SafeAirOne]

...and top routing the piping.


Can't talk you out of that top routing, eh? Well, at least with the CuNi piping, you won't have to access that line for quite a while.

[TJR]

I was talking about brake lines with a nearby friend and sent him these links to my picassa web album.


Brake line reference pics from my '73 ser 3 Dual brake system

bulkhead

http://picasaweb.google.com/88seriesiii/Bulkhead?authkey=Gv1sRgCLjeqLLq4vKPqwE&feat=directlink

and old chassis

http://picasaweb.google.com/88seriesiii/Old_chassis?authkey=Gv1sRgCOe6gcvq9pGfLQ&feat=directlink

[Tim Smith]

...Tim – If I ever buy that tool, I’ll be sure to PM you. No rental fee required. :thumb-up:Get it! Get it! Get it! :D

[jac04]

Given what I’ve learned, I'll be going with copper-nickel, double flaring throughout..
I'm still not sure where you learned that a double flare can be used in place of a bubble flare. They are not interchangeable. It's you brake system, so I'll stop bothering you about this now.

[SafeAirOne]

I'm still not sure where you learned that a double flare can be used in place of a bubble flare. They are not interchangeable. It's you brake system, so I'll stop bothering you about this now.

I was kind of wondering the same thing. While you may be able to convert the flare types on lines and fittings, you won't be able to change a wheel or master cylinder without machining it.

Double flares are "innies" whereas bubble flares are "outies".

Now the SAE convex bubble flare can be converted to the better DIN bubble flare pretty easily...

[I Leak Oil]

I'm still not sure where you learned that a double flare can be used in place of a bubble flare. They are not interchangeable. It's you brake system, so I'll stop bothering you about this now.

I suppose if you crank the crap out of the fittings you could get it to seal. You might never be able to get it apart or to reseal buy hey, what's a little money here or there? It's just as easy to make the correct flare as it is to make the wrong flare. And like most things in life it's just easier to put a round peg in a round hole.

[thixon]

I Leak Oil, both doubles and bubbles have a limited lifespan.

Jack IIa, use the method I described to you and you'll end up with a very easy to seal, almost correct flare. Its damn close to a bubble flare. A double flare will work, but you're not gonna get everyone to seal up tight. I've watched people do it too many times. You're success ratio will be about 70/30 on the bubble flares. In short, its a giant butt to make them with the standard tool you probably have.

I wasn't gonna bring this up, but what the heck. I know of a bunch of brit cars running SINGLE flares in place of the correct bubble flares. Go figure.

[I Leak Oil]

I Leak Oil, both doubles and bubbles have a limited lifespan.

I understand that, been there done that, but using the wrong flare usually turns the line you just made into a single use item, if you can even get it to seal.

What I don't understand is knowingly trying to use a different flare when the tools exist to do it right. That's just my opinion and it wouldn't happen on my truck. Again, that's just me.

[thixon]

I understand that, been there done that, but using the wrong flare usually turns the line you just made into a single use item, if you can even get it to seal.

What I don't understand is knowingly trying to use a different flare when the tools exist to do it right. That's just my opinion and it wouldn't happen on my truck. Again, that's just me.

Agreed.

Its funny, the guys I know who are running single flares did so because it was "easier" to seal up by cranking the fitting down tight as all heck. I don't get it, but oh well.

[JackIIA]

Well...I DID say I was looking for input...maybe wasn't expecting quite so much :D.

To do it completely by the book, I admit, my approach is not correct, but that doesn't mean it's not safe. Using copper-nickel allows the flaring to slightly mushroom. There are pipes that were originally one set of flarings and I've seen LR replacements with different flarings. Both are Land Rover issued, both the same part number. No change to required fittings, nor mention switch them. I know of others on this site whose opinions I respect have run double throughout their trucks without issue.

Could I use the RN steel lines and avoid all this? Yes. I don't want to touch the brake lines again though. And I don't have access to a flaring tool with a SAE Convex die. The solution might be to run DIN Flares, and I won't rule it out - double original got in my head because it was mentioned as the 'standard' flare on all series - obviously not the case.

Going with the DIN flare, you'd have the same problem to be true to the original though...running doubles in some places. The best compromise between the two is admittedly automec. I'll revisit it, and if it makes sense for my needs, I'll reconsider it. I'm not proud :rolleyes:. Thanks all.

[I Leak Oil]

Well...I DID say I was looking for input...maybe wasn't expecting quite so much :D.

Brake line flares....Such interesting reading I keep brake tubing supply catalogs in the crapper! Just kidding...kinda...