84_Chevy_K10
Banned
Post deleted by 84_Chevy_K10
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
Increasing front brake hose size opinions *DELETED*
- Thread starter 84_Chevy_K10
- Start date
BlueBlazer
1/2 ton status
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2001
- Posts
- 1,940
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
Brake pressure is a function of the caliper pistons resistance to movement, not the resistance of the lines. I think the main reasons manufacturers use small lines is because of cost and a smaller line is easier to route, not to create pressure in the system, and since there is very little flow in a brake system, a larger line is not needed. In short, you will be ok.
Brake pressure is a function of the caliper pistons resistance to movement, not the resistance of the lines. I think the main reasons manufacturers use small lines is because of cost and a smaller line is easier to route, not to create pressure in the system, and since there is very little flow in a brake system, a larger line is not needed. In short, you will be ok.
84_Chevy_K10
Banned
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
I might order up some fittings and go for it then. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Thanks.
I might order up some fittings and go for it then. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Thanks.
75-K5
3/4 ton status
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
You guys played nice this time, that makes me so happy /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif
You guys played nice this time, that makes me so happy /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif
84_Chevy_K10
Banned
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
You guys played nice this time, that makes me so happy /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
We talk almost every day on AIM. Tyler's not a bad guy we just rarely agree on something that isn't technical.
[ QUOTE ]
You guys played nice this time, that makes me so happy /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
We talk almost every day on AIM. Tyler's not a bad guy we just rarely agree on something that isn't technical.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
I, personally, like those 25" long ones off IFS 1 tons.
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
I, personally, like those 25" long ones off IFS 1 tons.
84_Chevy_K10
Banned
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
These are 40".
These are 40".
85mudblazin
1/2 ton status
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
holy crap, are these the hydralic hoses you were talking about or are they really street legal brake hoses??
holy crap, are these the hydralic hoses you were talking about or are they really street legal brake hoses??
laketex
3/4 ton status
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
Tim I think this might help you out:
That is all. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Tim I think this might help you out:
That is all. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
Brake pressure is a function of the caliper pistons resistance to movement, not the resistance of the lines. I think the main reasons manufacturers use small lines is because of cost and a smaller line is easier to route, not to create pressure in the system, and since there is very little flow in a brake system, a larger line is not needed. In short, you will be ok.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
[ QUOTE ]
Brake pressure is a function of the caliper pistons resistance to movement, not the resistance of the lines. I think the main reasons manufacturers use small lines is because of cost and a smaller line is easier to route, not to create pressure in the system, and since there is very little flow in a brake system, a larger line is not needed. In short, you will be ok.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't write the first part so I don't know what the f' you were thinking.
Hose diameter only matters outside of reason. It's the length of the hose that matters more. If your hard lines expand any noteworthy amount you have issues. If you're using crappy hoses (such as most cheap wannabe stainless braided ones) then get some stock ones.
Flow is more related to stroke and bore of the master cylinder.
I, personally, believe that it is more important to keep the hose short than the diameter small. I don't know anyone that has the 40" of wheel travel that a 25" long IFS Chevy hose can support.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't write the first part so I don't know what the f' you were thinking.
Hose diameter only matters outside of reason. It's the length of the hose that matters more. If your hard lines expand any noteworthy amount you have issues. If you're using crappy hoses (such as most cheap wannabe stainless braided ones) then get some stock ones.
Flow is more related to stroke and bore of the master cylinder.
I, personally, believe that it is more important to keep the hose short than the diameter small. I don't know anyone that has the 40" of wheel travel that a 25" long IFS Chevy hose can support.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
Increasing the diameter will cause the system to need and move a larger volume of fluid. I question the master cylinders ability to keep up with the demand.
My bet is this will cause a mushy pedal with poor performance, if any at all.
Increasing the diameter will cause the system to need and move a larger volume of fluid. I question the master cylinders ability to keep up with the demand.
My bet is this will cause a mushy pedal with poor performance, if any at all.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
I went through this though process on trying to decide what diameter lines I wanted to run on the Hydro assist setup.
Now the lines are larger diameter but its a closed system and a hydraulic one at that. I think you will end up with the same means to an end. The fitting off of the hard line is the same and the fitting on the caliper is also the same diameter. In a sealed system like that. I believe it would be just like running a longer brake line. Yu would have to push some more fluid but it works out in the end. Its not like its a fuel delivery system or a loop system of some kind. This is discounting hose expansion under load but if the hose is a quality one, it should be OK.
I say run it. I dont see how the MC would need more capacity on a closed system like that. Now if you were going to a larger Caliper or something like that, then the MC might become an issue.
I went through this though process on trying to decide what diameter lines I wanted to run on the Hydro assist setup.
Now the lines are larger diameter but its a closed system and a hydraulic one at that. I think you will end up with the same means to an end. The fitting off of the hard line is the same and the fitting on the caliper is also the same diameter. In a sealed system like that. I believe it would be just like running a longer brake line. Yu would have to push some more fluid but it works out in the end. Its not like its a fuel delivery system or a loop system of some kind. This is discounting hose expansion under load but if the hose is a quality one, it should be OK.
I say run it. I dont see how the MC would need more capacity on a closed system like that. Now if you were going to a larger Caliper or something like that, then the MC might become an issue.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
Increasing the diameter will cause the system to need and move a larger volume of fluid. I question the master cylinders ability to keep up with the demand.
[/ QUOTE ]
The slave cylinder moves a set distance...
The amount of fluid needed to move that set distance doesn't change...
Therefore the master cylinder need not move any more fluid...
The only thing that changes is that the fluid in the line physically moves less distance...
So, in essence, the size of the line between the master and slave cylinder affects the pressure applied to the slave cylinder negligibly. This is assuming that the line between the two doesn't expand. So, the goal is to keep the line as small as possible in order to keep the expansion of the line as small as possible. This is especially true of flexible lines.
It seems like in my readings years ago I read that brake hose specifications were based on increase in volume per unit pressure. So even though a hose might be larger in diameter it had to meet the same specifications in expansion as a smaller hose.
Anyway, keep the hoses short. If I were a rich person I'd probably use Earl's Speed-seal ends and Speed-flex hose.
[ QUOTE ]
Increasing the diameter will cause the system to need and move a larger volume of fluid. I question the master cylinders ability to keep up with the demand.
[/ QUOTE ]
The slave cylinder moves a set distance...
The amount of fluid needed to move that set distance doesn't change...
Therefore the master cylinder need not move any more fluid...
The only thing that changes is that the fluid in the line physically moves less distance...
So, in essence, the size of the line between the master and slave cylinder affects the pressure applied to the slave cylinder negligibly. This is assuming that the line between the two doesn't expand. So, the goal is to keep the line as small as possible in order to keep the expansion of the line as small as possible. This is especially true of flexible lines.
It seems like in my readings years ago I read that brake hose specifications were based on increase in volume per unit pressure. So even though a hose might be larger in diameter it had to meet the same specifications in expansion as a smaller hose.
Anyway, keep the hoses short. If I were a rich person I'd probably use Earl's Speed-seal ends and Speed-flex hose.
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
holy crap, are these the hydralic hoses you were talking about or are they really street legal brake hoses??
[/ QUOTE ]I don't think Tim runs his rig on the street. If you do they are supposed to be D.O.T approved.
[ QUOTE ]
holy crap, are these the hydralic hoses you were talking about or are they really street legal brake hoses??
[/ QUOTE ]I don't think Tim runs his rig on the street. If you do they are supposed to be D.O.T approved.
BlueBlazer
1/2 ton status
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2001
- Posts
- 1,940
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
I agree with you and Sandman 100%. Seeing as the line is not the restriction in the system, opening it up would not cause more flow nor a spongy pedal.
I agree with you and Sandman 100%. Seeing as the line is not the restriction in the system, opening it up would not cause more flow nor a spongy pedal.
BlueBlazer
1/2 ton status
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2001
- Posts
- 1,940
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
In theory you are correct, but without knowing the actual strength of the line Tim is using, its pretty hard to say that he would get more deflection in his line. I am assuming that the teflon lines he had made are far stronger than a stock rubber line, which would as you know offset the difference in hydraulic force inside the line between sizes.
In theory you are correct, but without knowing the actual strength of the line Tim is using, its pretty hard to say that he would get more deflection in his line. I am assuming that the teflon lines he had made are far stronger than a stock rubber line, which would as you know offset the difference in hydraulic force inside the line between sizes.
hawkeye649
1/2 ton status
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't write the first part so I don't know what the f' you were thinking.
Hose diameter only matters outside of reason. It's the length of the hose that matters more. If your hard lines expand any noteworthy amount you have issues. If you're using crappy hoses (such as most cheap wannabe stainless braided ones) then get some stock ones.
Flow is more related to stroke and bore of the master cylinder.
I, personally, believe that it is more important to keep the hose short than the diameter small. I don't know anyone that has the 40" of wheel travel that a 25" long IFS Chevy hose can support.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you beleive that chevy has a TSB out on corvettes that stainless steel brake lines void the warranty?
I'd be /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif if I had bought one. GM Make PISSA vehicles IMHO and I wouldn't buy one new if they payed me to take it off the lot (okay, maybe then /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif). Their [dis]service is really disgusting. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Line size doesn't matter... it's the piston size on each end of the line.
I think they use small lines because then they can get more fluid displacement and get fluid out of the hot caliper. I could just be imagining this too.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tube & hose size does matter, a LOT! In steel tubing there is almost 2.5 square inches more surface area per foot with -4 or 1/4" tubing over -3 or 3/16" tubing. It is nearly 1/3 of another front caliper piston's area. That's a lot more surface area that will deflect. Deflection = mushy pedal. Put your hand on your rubber brakes hose and have a buddy stand on the brake pedal. That should show you that small is good. Going too far and trying 1/8 will not flow enough and cause a delay in brake application.
Don't use -4 for brakes in passenger vehicles, it's OK for hyd clutches. Bigger trucks, like 5 tons, use 1/4" hoses b/c of the large wheel cylinder volume.
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't write the first part so I don't know what the f' you were thinking.
Hose diameter only matters outside of reason. It's the length of the hose that matters more. If your hard lines expand any noteworthy amount you have issues. If you're using crappy hoses (such as most cheap wannabe stainless braided ones) then get some stock ones.
Flow is more related to stroke and bore of the master cylinder.
I, personally, believe that it is more important to keep the hose short than the diameter small. I don't know anyone that has the 40" of wheel travel that a 25" long IFS Chevy hose can support.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you beleive that chevy has a TSB out on corvettes that stainless steel brake lines void the warranty?
I'd be /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif if I had bought one. GM Make PISSA vehicles IMHO and I wouldn't buy one new if they payed me to take it off the lot (okay, maybe then /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif). Their [dis]service is really disgusting. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
[ QUOTE ]
Can you beleive that chevy has a TSB out on corvettes that stainless steel brake lines void the warranty?
I'd be /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif if I had bought one. GM Make PISSA vehicles IMHO and I wouldn't buy one new if they payed me to take it off the lot (okay, maybe then /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif). Their [dis]service is really disgusting. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I can, most stainless lines are JUNK.
The way the aftermarket crimps the ends on those stainless lines is pathetic. Furthermore, most stainless lines are for bling only (some are just rubber regular hoses inside, no teflon) and all the stainless does is look pretty. The only "good" ends for stainless lines I've ever seen are Aeroquip's "super gem" and Earl's stuff.
I suspect there's a reason why Ferrari doesn't use them either.
If people are so worried about their brake lines why don't they change their fluid? Most fluid is saturated with water after two years.
The funny part about those aeroquip or earl's ends is that they CAN'T meet DOT requirements because the ends aren't swaged or crimped on. Even though they're a superior way of fastening.
[ QUOTE ]
Can you beleive that chevy has a TSB out on corvettes that stainless steel brake lines void the warranty?
I'd be /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif if I had bought one. GM Make PISSA vehicles IMHO and I wouldn't buy one new if they payed me to take it off the lot (okay, maybe then /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif). Their [dis]service is really disgusting. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I can, most stainless lines are JUNK.
The way the aftermarket crimps the ends on those stainless lines is pathetic. Furthermore, most stainless lines are for bling only (some are just rubber regular hoses inside, no teflon) and all the stainless does is look pretty. The only "good" ends for stainless lines I've ever seen are Aeroquip's "super gem" and Earl's stuff.
I suspect there's a reason why Ferrari doesn't use them either.
If people are so worried about their brake lines why don't they change their fluid? Most fluid is saturated with water after two years.
The funny part about those aeroquip or earl's ends is that they CAN'T meet DOT requirements because the ends aren't swaged or crimped on. Even though they're a superior way of fastening.
GMCLegacy
1/2 ton status
Re: Increasing front brake hose size opinions
i dont see a problem using hydro line, i had one on my rig for my rear axle.
comparing side by side nobody here would pick the stock line, it looked pathetic next to the double wall hydro line i replaced it with.
it may not have been DOT approved, but hell nothing else on the truck was either, and the rig didnt see a lot of road miles.
i dont see a problem using hydro line, i had one on my rig for my rear axle.
comparing side by side nobody here would pick the stock line, it looked pathetic next to the double wall hydro line i replaced it with.
it may not have been DOT approved, but hell nothing else on the truck was either, and the rig didnt see a lot of road miles.
