Can the brakes be changed to provide almost "brake on a dime?"

[gerstly1]

Hello,

I have a 1966 with the Highway Package. I have a Stuart (from Canada) brake booster. I have to slowly push on the pedal to allow braking, I was told I should get a dual master cylinder set up. But could I go further and obtain "modern braking?" I was also told I could possibly "open up" the rear brakes to improve braking somewhat. Thoughts? Thank you, Peter

[64ZCODE]

Hello Peter. Likely your brake booster is failing internally or not doing it's job due to a vacuum leak or fluid leaking inside the booster. It may also be the brakes are not adjusted properly, the linings are worn, the drums need to be turned or there is a blockage in the brake lines. Unless you're familiar with how to work on brakes, recommend taking the car to a good shop and have them diagnose and repair it.

You could fix the current drum brake setup or invest in a 4 wheel disc brake conversion. Upgrading to a dual master is certainly a good safety upgrade but it's not the reason your current brake setup isn't working well. The 4 wheel drum brake setup on my '64 is more than adequate for the way I drive the car but I get it that disc brakes would add a margin of safety for bringing that heavy car to a stop.

Doug

[Terry64HT]

65 and 66's had disc brakes on the front only (as did many other cars for a lot of years) and they perform markedly better that the all drum models. I've done the front only conversion on my 64 and it's like a different car. Front conversion kits are readily available, easy to install and much less than 4 wheel kits. I'm not sure that the extra cost for rear discs gives that much more improvement.
Terry
64HT

[gerstly1]

Hello Doug,

Thank you for your suggestions. So, with your drum brake set up do you find that you don't have to push down very far on the pedal to stop? Is it like a modern car's brakes?

Peter

[gerstly1]

Sorry, that should be Terry!,

Peter

[gerstly1]

Hello Doug,

Thank you for giving me all the possibilities. Yes, I will have a garage do the work. With your drum brake set up do you have to push down on the brake pedal for a fair distance? Or is the pedal travel like a modern car?

Peter

[64ZCODE]

Hello Peter. I would say there's just an inch of pedal travel then a firm pedal. But when I first got the '64, I had a situation similar to what you're describing. That plus the level of fluid in the brake reservoir was going down but not leaking under the car. Turned out the master cylinder seal was leaking fluid into the booster. I replaced the MC, cleaned the fluid out of the booster, and all has been well since.

That may not be the case with your car, but I would definitely check whether the booster or the MC or both are failing.

Doug

[jtschug]

A dual master will probably not improve the braking, but it will provide an extra level of safety.

The first Thunderbird I had, and I haven't had it for a couple decades, had what I considered at the time pretty good brakes. Totally 100% stock, but completely freshened and in those days there were still plenty of shops around that knew how to work on them. When I bought the car the brakes were totally seized, wheels literally dragged on the gravel.

Installed a new master, rebuilt the calipers, did a full brake job on the rears, and turned the rotors and drums. I might have replaced all the rubber hoses, but it has been so long, I don't remember.

After all of that, the pedal didn't have a lot of travel, but with moderate effort the brakes could lock.

Contrast that with the Thunderbird I have now where the brakes were never that good. Upon inspection, the rubber hoses had been replaced, the rotors and pads looked new the parking brake worked (which adjusts the shoes in the rear). The pedal was firm and doesn't feel like there are any problems with the MC. Yet, the car just isn't that great at stopping. I first chalked this up to the fact that this one is a convertible and a bit heavier.

This convertible was a bit better than a basket case when I got it, the brakes worked, so they weren't top of the priority list as I worked on other things: like the fact that it rolled in park and the secondary on the carb was wired shut.

Eventually (like 15 years later...) I worked my way down the list to do some brake upgrades. Changed all the lines to stainless, replaced the rear drums with 4-piston discs, and replaced the MC with a dual MC and an adjustable prop valve. I took it to a gravel parking lot to set the prop valve adjustment and I can't get the brakes to lock up. Even when I grab the steering wheel with both hands and push the brake pedal with both feet, the car slows down quickly, but does not lock the brakes. After all these modifications, the brakes on this car are not as good as the stock brakes I had on my first Thunderbird.

So, then I thought, perhaps my roller cam in the engine doesn't make enough vacuum for the brake booster. I added an electric vacuum pump and now I have a steady 19 inches of vacuum. This has certainly helped the speed of brake engagement, now they are more sensitive than my daily driver, but after a good amount of brake pressure, the brakes seem to run out of boost, and under a panic stop situation, I find myself once again grabbing the wheel with both hands and pushing the pedal with both feet and the brakes do not lock. Not as good as the stock brakes in my first Thunderbird.

This has led me to the last part in the system that hasn't been touched: the brake booster. I knew it was a weird one because it looks a little different from the brake boosters in other 1966 Thunderbirds I've seen. I have a large collection of photos I take of the underhood area of all the Flairbirds at every show I go to. Last year I identified the booster in my car as a Midland used in the 1964 and earlier all drum brake system. It is shorter than the Midland typically used in a 1965-66 disc brake setup. There has been a lot of talk about how hard it is to find correct brake boosters these days, but I was able to find a salvage unit which I sent away for a rebuild. I have that rebuilt unit now on my workbench and eventually I plan to tackle the job. Hopefully I can get everything to fit, it will move my dual MC forward more than an inch (hopefully it won't crash into the cowl brace) and it will be closer to my aluminum finned valve covers (hopefully that won't require more than a little bit of grinding). This will take me a while, so I'm waiting a bit to do it. There are a few other issues which aren't as invasive I want to straighten out first.

Long story short: I made modifications to try and improve the brakes, but if I had just focused on the one part that didn't belong in my stock system, I probably would have better brakes today and I would have spent a lot less money.

[gerstly1]

Hello Doug,

That's great to hear about only an inch of brake pedal travel. Very encouraging! I will check the booster and the MC. I appreciate your advice.

Peter

[gerstly1]

Hello,

I appreciate hearing about your experience. Thank you for giving me all the details. I will check the booster first before anything else.

Peter

[David Langhorne]

To anyone thinking of doing a rear disc conversion in the hope of stopping quicker I would think again. You don't want the rears to be more powerful then the existing drums or you will be in danger of skidding sideways on any wet or icy roads. I'm sure the Ford designers decided the front/rear proportions best suited to these cars back in the day. If the rear drums are in good order - very simple to check - then why swap them? I can see the desirability of front discs if you are going to do a lot of crash stops in a short time but who does that these days?
My 65 stops like any modern car after replacing front pistons and seals and seized rear adjusters and fixing many fluid leaks - from long neglect by
non mechanically minder PO and possibly fraudulent repair shops.