Do you need to replace the master cylinder?

Tech tips and how to's

Moderators: notoptoy, S Allen, Solex68

Post Reply
User avatar
ppeters914
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 3075
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Lake Forest Park, WA (just north of Seattle)
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Do you need to replace the master cylinder?

Post by ppeters914 »

From the Volvo Front Brake Conversion:
If you plan on doing it to an earlier car you might want to upgrade the single brake master cylinder to a 1975-77 280Z 7/8" cylinder.
I know it's probably a good idea, but is it absolutely necessary?
Pete
-------------------------------------
'67 1600 - frame off started in 2014. Now I know why roadster projects take so long. What a stupid idea. :smt021
'66 1600 - parts car
'66 WPL411 ***SOLD***
A couple of Porsches, a RAV4 Hybrid, and a motorcycle
User avatar
clunker
Roadster Nut
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Volvo Brake Conversion

Post by clunker »

I just completed the Volvo swap on my 66 1600 and the brake work great with the orignal master cylinder in place. I am not sure you will have the same luck but I thought I would share this information at least.
Steve Moore
1966 1600 (swapping a U20 in)
---------------------------------------------------
Nope, its supposed to make that noise.
User avatar
S Allen
Site Admin
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:57 pm
Location: Knoxville, IA(Lake Redrock)Emory, TX
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5
Contact:

RE:M/C

Post by S Allen »

Clunker, that is good news that the brakes work fine with the single brake master. Pete, with a 67 and earlier it is just about impossible to put the dual M/C in with a stock motor without recreating the pocket similiar to the 67.5's and above. The dual M/C will hit the air cleaner and possibly the rear carb. Just not enough room. The dual circuit is more of a safety factor than a performance factor. Just make sure you have a good e-brake just in case. 8)

Steve
66 Stroker-Going Orange
67 SRL311-00279-resto project
Stock '72 240Z-Blue
2002 Ford F250 7.3 Diesel 2WD Hauler
2008 Toyota FJ Cruiser
2009 Smart ForTwo Passion Coupe
2013 Fiat 500 Abarth
User avatar
ppeters914
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 3075
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Lake Forest Park, WA (just north of Seattle)
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Post by ppeters914 »

Clunker: Yes, that's terrific. My stock m/c appears to be okay. Not having to replace it saves me $70+.

- Did you have some old Volvo calipers, or did you just pay the core charge?
- Which plumbing option did you use; #1 or #2?
- Any gotchas, words of advice, etc?

Steve: Yes, I understand that the stock dual m/c (the 510 also?) only fit in the pocket that exists on 67.5 and later roadsters (Saaaaaaaay, wasn't Michael thinking of marketing a kit for that based on Wild Bill's car?).

What wasn't clear to me in the conversion write up is whether the suggested 1975-77 280Z 7/8-inch m/c was single or dual. Just looked it up and found it's a dual. Does this dual -NOT- have a problem hitting the rear carb?

There's also been some posts mentioning cutting down the reservoir or using the old one to clear the hood. Perhaps this could be clarified in the write up.

Thanks.
Pete
-------------------------------------
'67 1600 - frame off started in 2014. Now I know why roadster projects take so long. What a stupid idea. :smt021
'66 1600 - parts car
'66 WPL411 ***SOLD***
A couple of Porsches, a RAV4 Hybrid, and a motorcycle
User avatar
S Allen
Site Admin
Posts: 4539
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:57 pm
Location: Knoxville, IA(Lake Redrock)Emory, TX
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5
Contact:

RE:Z Dual M/C

Post by S Allen »

The Z dual M/C for the earlier non-pocketed cars is for the engine conversion crowd only unless you add the pocket. I thought I had that in there but I guess it is as clear as mud eh?? I will tweak the write-up so it explains things in more detail. I am pretty sure Michael cut the pocket from a donor car and fabbed it into the earlier car. I was going to do that but there is no need with an SR motor.

Steve
66 Stroker-Going Orange
67 SRL311-00279-resto project
Stock '72 240Z-Blue
2002 Ford F250 7.3 Diesel 2WD Hauler
2008 Toyota FJ Cruiser
2009 Smart ForTwo Passion Coupe
2013 Fiat 500 Abarth
User avatar
ppeters914
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 3075
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Lake Forest Park, WA (just north of Seattle)
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Post by ppeters914 »

Ahhhh, now that makes sense. Yes, definitely tweak away! :)

Nope, no engine swap for me, so guess I'll just stick w/ the stock single m/c. This also makes it easier. :P

Hmmm, I thought Michael fabricated it from scratch. Guess I need to go look at those pics again.
Pete
-------------------------------------
'67 1600 - frame off started in 2014. Now I know why roadster projects take so long. What a stupid idea. :smt021
'66 1600 - parts car
'66 WPL411 ***SOLD***
A couple of Porsches, a RAV4 Hybrid, and a motorcycle
User avatar
clunker
Roadster Nut
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Post by clunker »

- Did you have some old Volvo calipers, or did you just pay the core charge?
- Which plumbing option did you use; #1 or #2?
- Any gotchas, words of advice, etc?
1. I paid the core but found a place that was not too bad. (~$15 a piece)
2. I went with the manifold because of ease and simplicity. Worked great too.
3. The only gotcha I had was that the rubber brake lines I had replace earlier that year didn't fit in the manifold. This was just a problem with the length of the threaded portion of the manfold being too short for that brake lines I had. I just ended up buying the steel brake lines.

All in all it went pretty easy. If you have an more question feel free to email me.
Steve Moore
1966 1600 (swapping a U20 in)
---------------------------------------------------
Nope, its supposed to make that noise.
User avatar
It's a D-A-T-S-U-N
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Kingwood, TX

Post by It's a D-A-T-S-U-N »

clunker wrote:
- Did you have some old Volvo calipers, or did you just pay the core charge?
- Which plumbing option did you use; #1 or #2?
- Any gotchas, words of advice, etc?
1. I paid the core but found a place that was not too bad. (~$15 a piece)
2. I went with the manifold because of ease and simplicity. Worked great too.
3. The only gotcha I had was that the rubber brake lines I had replace earlier that year didn't fit in the manifold. This was just a problem with the length of the threaded portion of the manfold being too short for that brake lines I had. I just ended up buying the steel brake lines.

All in all it went pretty easy. If you have an more question feel free to email me.
1) I paid the core charge as well. ($15/each).
2) Used Breck Meyer's manifolds... the aluminum washers supplied with the Earl's banjo bolts leaked the first time! I replaced them w/copper crsuh washers, all OK now!
3) My rubber brake hose threaded fittings were too long as well. I modified them by shortening them, chasing the threads and using copper crush washers as seals.

Installed Stan's firewall brace.

I'm impressed with the conversion, been driving around since with a BIG GRIN! :D
1968 SPL311
2000 Acura Integra GSR
2002 Honda S2000
Post Reply