Vintage Thunderbird Club International

So, I have been looking for a reasonable alternative brake booster for my 65 and I found something cheap and gave it a shot. Here are the results:

The victim: 8" Dual diaphragm booster from amazon (made by inline tube). Looked about right and was only $55 so I figured I would be a guinea pig.

The results: the studs behind the booster are closer together on the universal one. The factory bracket would need to be modified, but could be done without too much difficulty. There would also have to be small spacers as well to clear the studs and space he push-rod out the equivalent amount. the push-rod on the new one is threaded and much too long. It would have to be cut and some kind of female booster eyelet or hiem joint used. Definitely doable.



What I am unsure of: It's a bit smaller. I would have rather found a 9" Dual diaphragm. But People seem to be using these on heavier vehicles with no issues. My thinking was that the much newer booster would be more efficient for it's size.
The angle of the booster itself: The factory booster is angled downward ( i think) slightly. The universal is level. I think this may have a slight effect on the fluid being level, but not much else.. Thoughts?

So this can definitely be done, but I've kind of put a pause on it because I have a few doubts and once I modify my factory brackets I can't unmodify them.

Here are a few pics for comparison. I'm not the best picture taker. But I'd love to hear your thoughts.

-David

Also.. this would definitely give you some extra clearance for a Dual bowl master cyl if it were to work.

I haven't measured, but it's probably an inch or so more clearance. I will post when I check. And try to take some pics.

Thanks for trying this upgrade and writing it up for us.
Unfortunately, boosters haven't gotten any more efficient but you're going in the right direction with the dual 8 inch:
9" single booster surface area is (½·9)²·pi or, 4.5²·3.14 = 63.585 sq.in.
Dual 8" booster is (½·8)²·pi + (½·8)²·pi or 4²·3.14 x2 = 101.12 sq. in.

(The above was shamelessly stolen from another site)

Is the overall length of the new booster any longer than the old one? My problem would be tryin gto fit a longer body.

Scott

I would say it's about an inch shorter. Even with spacers to space it out. But I need to get a real measurement.

Shorter is good news. I've seen that booster on all kind of bigger cars at shows as well. Lots of tri-5 Chevy's, etc.
I'm running the stock single 9" booster with my 65~67 disc's and it works "OK" but a little more assist would be nice. I don't have any problems using them but the pedal feel is not as light as the original drum system was.

You normally have a clip like this on the end of the rod

Scott

All of the original boosters on our cars are dual diaphragm aren't they? I haven't taken mine apart, but I guess I assumed it was because of how deep it is.

-David

No, the drum/drum brake cars had single boosters. They went to dual's with the disc/drum update.


S

RedBird64 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:22 pm No, the drum/drum brake cars had single boosters. They went to dual's with the disc/drum update.

S

'65 is Disc fronts/Drum rears.

I think we finally have a winner on what we can do to use these universal pattern brake boosters!

this bracket looks perfect! I am going to order one and let everyone know how this works.

This will check 2 boxes for what I am looking for... a NEW modern brake booster... and smooth, unrestricted, and quiet pedal operation!

The firewall grommet looks like it will work too as an added bonus.

http://mbmbrakes.com/ft5772bpr-1957-197 ... r-bracket/

Here is the old bracket for comparison. I will take measurements, but I'm 10% certain this will work. The most I may have to do is reuse the old lever arms with the new brackets.

Ok.. That came in quick! Here are my results so far!

1. It sits out about an 1" further than the stock bracket. You still gain 1/2" clearance in front of the master cyl.

2. It sits about 1.5" lower than the original bracket (there is some adjustment here). This seems like great news if it doesnt interfere with any of the steering or accelerator stuff. Anybody have any ideas on this? My engine, steering, and accelerator stuff is out of the car at the moment.

3. Even with the differences.. It bolts up perfectly, fits on the brake pedal pin perfectly.. And has the correct resting position when the booster clevis is adjusted. (Had to cut about 1" off of the rod).

4. the ford MC doesnt fit. Not sure why I never checked before.. But this isnt a big deal. I am looking at the wilwood compact dual mc. It seems perfect. My mc choices will be much less limited now.

Original booster and bracket= 9 1/2" from firewall to MC mount pad.

New booster and bracket= 9" from firewall to MC pad


Pics attached. I am keeping the old setup so that I can bolt it on when I get it runng to compare the 2.

1 problem you may have, because it sits lower it may hit the valve covers on the engine.

I was looking at a picture that I took of the engine and thinking the same thing. But the diameter of the new one is smaller than the original. So, I will put it in after I drop the engine in, just to be safe.

I really wish I took more "before" pics for reference.

The other cool thing about this is that you can run the bolts the other way so you can tighten the nuts in the engine compartment.. Much easier!