I had only had the truck for four days in 2006 when I lost my brakes 1.5 miles from home and rolled through a 4-way stop.
Here is an original picture of the truck which body wise seemed to be in good but some mechanical parts not so much. After that episode the brakes always made me nervous especially since I couldn’t find anything obvious as to why I lost my brakes. I spent a lot of time rebuilding them back then and trying to find decent drums yet that single pot master was always in the back of my mind.
In 2009 I found a rare 1966 F-100 in the most local Pick & Pull near me and it had power drum brakes. So I took the booster out and sent it off to Booster Dewey to rebuild as he has done several of mine. It then sat on the shelf for years in a box. In the meantime I kept driving the truck a bit but then had it off line for 18 months when the 360 crankcase filled up with water just sitting there and a rebuild ensued. Much has been done to this truck but I’ll only deal with the installation of the power booster and dual master. I don’t know if this qualifies as a COAL where one could go into it’s complete restoration to stock once again. Now moving on.
This is the basic junction block used to take the main line and split it into two lines for front and one line back. Seen as removed and then cleaned up.
Here is the original line and the start of a new line. I am using nickle copper brake line which is easy to bend and form. I made the curves by winding the line around a broom handle. That clip on the new line is used half way down to hold the long line steadily in place till it reaches the junction block on the frame.
Since I need a vacuum line I had to form a metal line of which I had some stock on the wall. When bought it already has fittings on both ends but I only need on one end so cut the piece I need and go from there.
With that the booster is put into place. The brackets were cleaned and painted and I obtaining a bellows to cover the pushrod between the booster and firewall. One can make an adjustment on the small rod sticking out from the booster. Had a tool to measure the clearance and it was too much unless the rod was at maximum extension plus some. So I took some round metal rod and cut a piece to fit into the master in front of the booster rod which got me what I needed.
As you can see I rotated the booster around once I started to fit things in and see if there were any obstructions. The bracket holding that proportioning valve was key and some holes needed to be re-drilled. The valve will allow me to regulate pressure to the rear so it doesn’t lock up before the front. The master cylinder is for a 1967 Mustang I believe with equal sized reservoirs as I am working with drums all around. Also the bore size was correct for the truck. The upper lines are in.
The two large main lines are now in place here after spending some time forming them to bend down in the same place, clear the rag joint, run past the middle bracket so both can be attached and then down to the junction block.
Junction block mounts behind the steering box. I bought a coupler so I could mate the new rear feed line to the original rear line to the back. I then blocked off it’s former location on the block and added my new front feed line. So now we are all set only we weren’t and weren’t for months. After filling the master and letting sit the upper lines leaked brake fluid out on the bottom of the bracket and there was a leak down here. How could that be?
I wasn’t using the hand method to make flares but rather the Eastwood hydraulic press which made it easy. Only after making four new lines they also leaked slightly up top and tremendously down below when I pushed on the brake pedal. This caused things to drag out for months as I would get frustrated. Then I discovered the reason for the leaks.
I was using the so called good line cutter I had bought many years ago but had somehow acquired a cheap line cutter seen on the left. If you look closely you can see what the initial cuts look like before one reams the burrs and maybe chamfers the outer edges a bit. The lines done by the cutter on the right all leaked while none of the last four, made by the cutter on the left, did. So cutter on the right into the trash.
With that problem solved now I could fill up the master and after two weeks there were no leaks. Next stepping on the brake pedal caused no leaks to appear under pressure so time to take out on the road around the house only. This upgrade made a visible difference in braking compared to stock. I’d place it between my 68 all drum Mustang and my 68 power disc Cougar. Before it always felt like I needed both feet on the brakes (very little pedal movement) to be safe given my nervousness from long ago. Now one foot, like all my cars, some pedal travel, and you are stopped. I liked it. Adjusted the proportioning valve in a deserted school parking lot so all four brakes grabbed at the same time during a panic stop. All this was done through most of 2021 to the beginning of this year.
Most important of all I didn’t make a flare before putting a fitting on.
Gives me flashbacks of redoing the brakes on my 1974 C10. I kept manual brakes, thank God it had disk up front from the factory. And yes, my partner made a flare before putting the fitting on during that job. Live and learn!
The brakes on my 1969 F-100 Ranger are what’s keeping it from being on the road. Not looking forward to tackling them.
Great job, and nice truck! I actually prefer that bodystyle to my ’69, but it’s been in my family since new, so I feel a bit obligated to fix it up and resist offers to buy it.
My ’66 F100’s braking system is 100% stock. I don’t find the brakes hard at all; it’s pretty easy to lock up the rears in the rare case of an emergency stop (something I generally avoid).
I had a problem with master cylinders having an internal leak, which results in a loss of brake pressure. I would have to give it a quick pump once and then it worked. This was early in my ownership (1988 or so) and a new master solved the problem. It too went soft about ten years later, but the one I put on then has been just fine ever since.
I get a lot of pressure from folks antsy about single master brake systems. I do wonder just how often they actually failed/fail. Obviously a dual system is “safer”, but then this is hardly a safe vehicle anyway you look at it.
Congratulations on a well-done job. I used to think I would do the dual master upgrade on mine, but this post makes it look more challenging than I was hoping for. I’ll pass for now.
If the brakes had pedal pressure similar to my Mustang that would have been nice. What would have been nicer is not having the brakes fail and not being able to find any obvious failure point. From that point on it was always in the back of my mind when driving. Especially so when exiting the freeway on a downward slope from 65 to 0 at the bottom. I don’t ever pray but I would talk to someone then. As for challenging the changing out of a transmission seems pretty challenging to me.
My cousin had a 1965 F-100 he bought in Colorado (was a school maintenance truck in the same district as an infamous event some years ago). I drove it a lot, and we used it extensively for work. 240 I-6, 4 speed (1st low gear obviously) manual with reverse located to the right and up (haven’t seen one like it before or since, although I think I read up on it at one point many years ago).
Especially with a load behind it, you had to give the brakes a couple of pumps before they’d really grab. We were frequently on dirt roads (miles of Forest service roads at one site), and you could feel different wheels locking up before others if you hit them too hard (unavoidable when some idiot, or a log truck, comes around the corner way too fast taking up most of the available road).
Once you got used to the truck’s quirks, it was a helliva workhorse. It never met a load it couldn’t pull. Just don’t be in a hurry, and it’d work all day without protest.
It’s really what started my love for classic American trucks with Inline 6s, that eventually led to my purchasing the 1974 C10 with the 250 I-6 I have now. From the same cousin, btw.
“manual with reverse located to the right and up (haven’t seen one like it before or since, although I think I read up on it at one point many years ago)”
Warner T-18
That’s it, couldn’t remember it and didn’t take the time to look it up again. Thanks Fred!
Every vehicle I know of that was originally equipped with a single master system also had some type of mechanical brake. Usually actuated the rear brakes only, but some older Chrysler systems actuated a drive shaft brake. While these 2 wheel mechanical systems were obviously not as effective as 4 wheel brakes, keeping them in good working condition should at least prevent a complete loss of braking.
When I took driver-ed back in the 60s, part of the course include practice stops at the county fairground using only the mechanical emergency brake. We had to practice using 3 types of systems. They were the step on type (’68 Impala – our regular driver-ed car), the umbrella handle type (older Rambler of uncertain vintage loaned by local dealer) and the center lever type (one of a few times I got to drive a VW bug).
A key learning was to always use the release & brake together so you could modulate the brakes and prevent rear wheel lockup. I imagine they must have stopped teaching that since the advent of dual master systems.
I imagine they must have stopped teaching that since the advent of dual master systems.
Quite right, as by the time I took driver ed in 1970, that was not part of the driving program, although I do seem to remember it being mentioned in the classroom portion.
Just for fun, I used to use the emergency brake in my VW from time to time, on the rural roads in Iowa and such. With its rear weight bias, they weren’t all that bad, and didn’t lock up too quickly.
But then it had a nice big center lever, designed back in the day when emergency brakes were not uncommonly used as such, and not just for hydraulic failure, as the VW had mechanical brakes, well into the 50s for the low end Standard version.
I sometimes go through the mental exercise of what I would do if the brakes went out in my F100. The umbrella handbrake sucks; I can’t even trust it on a steeper grade along with the truck being in gear. And that’s after I serviced it a few years back. That’s a horrible design, the ergonomics are all wrong. A step on brake would be better, but then you have to use the release to keep from a pure lockup situation.
Actually, a rear wheel lock up is not all that bad except for losing directional control. It will stop the vehicle as fast or faster than a modulated braking.
The lines from the master cylinder to the proportioning valve should be looped at least one turn, otherwise vibration can cause cracking.
The master cylinder *should* have pressure-holding check valves that maintain a small amount of positive pressure on the wheel cylinders- just enough keep the pistons snug, but not enough to cause drag. A low pedal after extended sitting is a sign they’re not working.
Manual drum brakes are fine, the drum brake is “self energizing” so pedal effort is fine, also the pedal ratio is usually different with manual brakes. I learned on manual brakes and found the early power brakes “touchy”.
I do get the niggling prospects of the freeway exit, I have one that is blind, down hill and short with no escape routes. Always approach cautiously, tap the brakes and roll over the top and see what the locals are up to today. The shoulders usually are littered with bits of broken plastic.
Nice truck and great work. I like to think of my 1993 F-150 as a “restoration, one repair project at a time;” one that has been ongoing for 22 years. The most challenging project for me so far was the broken shift tube … I’d never heard of a “shift tube” until mine broke at a recycling center of all places!
It also helps if your “restoration project” is not your daily driver. My dd is a 1993 Mercury Grand Marquis with its own list of repair projects, none of which have been too serious … yet.
I can very much relate, Randy! It’s a labor of love, isn’t it?
That’s real nice work. Copper-nickel hardlines are a whole hell of a lot easier than steel to bend and work with, and vastly more corrosionproof. And good onya for making those loop-de-loop-de-loops in the line; those are important to allow for flex with vehicle movement. I’ve seen a lot of people leave those out—good recipe for metal fatigue and resultant badness.
The copper-nickel lines are part of the reason the tubing cutter would smush the tubing. I have had a similar cutter that was fine cutting steel brake lines but did similar deforming when cutting soft copper line. Was fine on hard copper.
Ah ha…
Seeing as how the cutter on the right was of a higher quality, I suspect that a new cutter wheel would have saved it from the trashcan! 🙂
On my Packard it has a vacuum canister between the manifold vacuum and the power brakes, with an inline check-valve. It’s there so that you still have some vacuum (and hence boosted brakes) if the engine dies. Pretty nice feature, it’s just stuck inside the fender, probably you have room there too.
Nice truck ! .
-Nate
Regarding the cuts by different tubing cutters.
Patience, patience. The larger cutter has a larger body, which gives much more leverage, which allows a faster cut. The small one has what, half an inch, maybe 3 quarters of an inch for leverage? The larger one is more like 4 inches. Normally a good thing. If it had been used much slower, I bet it would be a similar cut.
Nope. One, neither had ever been used that much. Two, I am always slow and purposeful when working on cars and the carrier. Going fast on bolts, nuts, or turning one of these only gets you in trouble eventually. Those two cuts where done at the exact same speed which was one turn at a time.