Sounds good. On a side note, although I wasn't the one to mention it, I looked at my two 4x4 trucks that are both original paint and San Jose assembly plant and they both have hints of flat black underneath the FORD letters. Here's a picture of the "F" on my white truck.





Really not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but thought I'd post a shot of that detail.


.

 

LOL. I will on both accounts.

And honestly it's not from ignorance I speak (or type). I know of two others in my car club, plus myself, that have survived total brake failure. And we're all ultra mechanical types, so maintenance wasn't an issue. It's not a fun experience.

Many people are not aware they have the option, which is the only reason I posted it. As the pres of a local car club I established a club policy of doing this upgrade for members if they buy the M/C. The club supplies all the fittings and labor and to-date have done maybe about a dozen so far. Most of these people had no clue such an upgrade was so cheap to do and available to them. Or that the potential for failure was even there.

In two of these cases it was potential for utter disaster escaped only by... who knows what. Depends on what you believe, I guess. I nearly wrapped my '56 F100 Panel around a phone pole back in the 80's when mine failed. The '56 had a great pull-style e-brake handle - one I'd love to have on my new '66.

Fluid levels really have nothing to do with this failure in all cases. When they go, they go. Unless you use synthetic brake fluid water is always going to be found in brake fluid because it is hygroscopic. This water settles and eventually rusts the bottom of all the cylinders. Eventually this rust chews up the rubber cups and at some point, when you least expect it, bam! In a frantic "pump-pump - gotta stop" scenario you can usually stop even with maladjusted rear brakes. But, that said, you can also (if fluid level is OK) get the single M/C or faulty wheel cylinder to partially function if pushed hard and fast enough. You can only hope you're given that opportunity.

It's the nature, I feel, for clubs and car forums to pass along experiences and information. Ultimately it's up to the individual to decide what they want to do with that information. I tend to always err towards passing on as much of what I know as I can.

Anyway, I know, it's a debate that'll go on forever and ever, amen. Keeping a single system "fresh" is the key. But I know all too well that there are a lot of not-so-fresh systems still out there.

 

I was rear-ended by a woman in a 1980's Camaro some time ago. No damage to my rear bumper. Her Styrofoam was showing...


She hit the brakes but the anti-lock feature caused them to partially fail on her. Nice, well maintained car. She took a cigarette to the forearm when her airbag went off. Her own cigarette. Cooked her arm pretty good. Brake failures can happen to any car at any time with no warning. How are you possibly going to protect against that? Dual master cylinders would probably give a person a false sense of security in some cases. Can't fail, right?


.

 

Made it home alive! Whew....


The other thing about her rear ender was the passengers airbag went off and the cover flipped up and hit the inside of the windshield, breaking the windshield in what could only be described as adding insult to injury.


You did make some points that show how weak the system is. Wheel cylinders rusting through and rubber boots failing. Those happen regardless of how many reservoirs are under the main cap.


After nearly a half century of doing brake jobs and observing I'm convinced that brakes don't actually DO anything. We stop our cars using mental telepathy and the brakes are only there for the "placebo effect". As peoples belief in the single master waned, which was really only some people not maintaining the necessary telepathy, improvements have been need to restore the "effect". Dual masters, disc in front, disc in back, bigger rotors, more pistons in the caliper. All needed because some people lost the ability to "believe".


Welcome to The Matrix.


.

 

All true enough. Certainly no debate there. But it's sort of an apples oranges comparison. It's not certain she reacted as you say. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't. I'm sure that's her story and she's stickn' to it.

Total brake failure on a single system was probably your only chance for stopping in an emergrncy, whereas a dual system is two distinct brake systems. Statistically they are safer. And of course they fail too, but you will likely be 50% safer. All improvements, even ABS, reduce the chances of failing to stop in time. But there is nothing 100% fool-proof or fail-proof.

 

My buddy has this truck that I might be able to get a dual master cylinder off of his 1967 F100 Custom Cab. Would it fit my 1966 F250 4x4? Lol.





.

 

Wow - that's like magic! Thank you Google Maps - AKA Big Brother!


But sure, it's got power brakes too, so bonus add! And as soon as the '66 is on the road it'll be up for sale. Pretty cheap too. Underneath all that beat-to-heck skin is fairly decent stuff.





Double-Oh's 67

 

Sorry Mr. Astronaut for the thread Hijack.

Back to our regularly scheduled program...

Nice, nice truck you built! It's providing me with lots of motivation.

 

We've taken over his thread completely. He was done with it anyway...on to his next job. Lol.


From the looks there if I paid you 100K you could do just as fine of a job. That 1967 looks fantastic underhood!!


Here's also a shot of the "F" on my red truck, also showing the black background.





.

 

Ah, I'm sure I could do it for $99K and a bigger garage.

Here's a small sample of motors I've laid hands on in the past couple years. There are more, but this is all I could get photos for from here. I'm currently building a friend's 69 Fastback with a new 351W, TKO 5 speed, and a host of other goodies he wants in it. Too soon to picture it.




And now... back on topic...


I also looked at the pics from when I bought my '66 and it's all original with no black paint that I can see behind the letters. I do like it better with the contrasting black. When I can work on the exterior more I may do that.





No black contrast paint.

 

Nice engine bay work Double O! Def like the Ranchero w/ V8 better than 6. LOL

 

Been awhile since I checked in, appreciate you guys pointing out the blacked out background for the FORD lettering. We'll correct that detail next time it's in the shop. We're planning on showing it at the F100 Supernationals so we'll have it back to detail it before the show.

To comment on the posts about the level of restoration done; no one will ever be able to 100% replicate an original truck as it left the line. I do think that we could have gotten closer with the panel fit, we could have used lacquer(?) and not wetsanded and buffed the paint. The Corvette guys are probably the best at attempting to accurately recreate the original fit and finish when restoring a car. So it's possible to get closer to original than what we achieved, but that wasn't our goal with the truck. We wanted it to be stock as far as what was correct with parts, colors, etc, but better than it was originally in terms of fit and finish. As body and paint guys, we strive to get the body as straight as possible and the paint as "flat" as possible. It's not the way they were, but it is the way the designers intended them to be. They surely didn't sculpt uneven gaps and misaligned panels into the clay models. I can appreciate either type of restoration attempt, but personally I enjoy the challenge of, and prefer the final outcome of getting one straight as possible.

 

My exclusive daily driver from '07 until last April was a '64 VW Bug with single circuit drum brakes. Put 87,000 miles on it and never had an issue getting it stopped, even when one of the flex lines rubbed through one night. Had to limp it home by downshifting and braking early with the e-brake.

My current daily is an '87 Conquest TSi with four wheel disc and it doesn't stop as well as the VW. Not that it has bad or inadequate brakes, but the VW actually stops a good bit harder from 60. Tires are the difference.

Tires are just as important as having good brakes. It does no good to have upgraded the brakes if the tires lose grip and lock up. Dad had a '57 VW with identical brakes as my '64 but it has reproduction Firestone bias ply tires with very little grip. It's almost scary. My '64 with fairly sticky 195's will pull .99g from 60 mph. The Conquest will do .87g. I haven't tested the '57 VW but I doubt it would do over .75g. It's good to have upgraded brakes but make sure the tires are up to the task as well.

 

Some might say if you want to restore a 60's era built ford to "factory" appearance all one would need to do is make sure the body is reasonably straight with a semi nice paint job and that the panels all fit together ..... within a factory spec 1/8" of each other of course LMAO .


theastronaut , you went well beyond what any Ford line worker would have cared about doing while attempting to do as little as possible to get his paycheck LOL


Great job , my hat is off to you .

 

Appreicate it!!