Brake Questions - Help

-
Mattax said:
Entirely different. It's a metering valve. Not used on a-body's. If you flip to the next page, you'll see the check list of what goes with which brake system. I did say it could be confusing!

Metering valves were used to hold off brake pressure on the front lines when the pedal is first applied. This was reduce the chance of front lock up on very slick surfaces such as ice. As the car begins to slow the weight transfers foward and the tires will bite better as the front brakes get their full pressure.
Click to expand...

Oh I see so the 1969 Barracuda is considered a "Compact"? Yeah it is confusing. This manual it seems is for 1970s.
 
dennisonwj said:
Oh I see so the 1969 Barracuda is considered a "Compact"? Yeah it is confusing. This manual it seems is for 1970s.
Click to expand...
Yes and yes. I only posted that 1970 manual so you could see the combination block A/J had mentioned.
All of the A-bodies were considered compacts.
When the Cricket and later Colt, etc, were added to the line-up, I'm pretty sure those were called sub-compacts.

I checked what I paid from Kanter, (doing business as old.parts on ebay) it was just under $200. Still not cheap.

* I should mention there was a change in drum brake hardware starting in 1969. So definately use '69 and up references when working with the drum hardware and shoes.
 
Last edited:
Mattax said:
Yes and yes. I only posted that 1970 manual so you could see the combination block A/J had mentioned.
All of the A-bodies were considered compacts.
When the Cricket and later Colt, etc, were added to the line-up, I'm pretty sure those were called sub-compacts.

I checked what I paid from Kanter, (doing business as old.parts on ebay) it was just under $200. Still not cheap.
Click to expand...


Okay, I will see what I can find one for, but the one I bought will work if I watch the fluid, huh? The one in there when I opened it, the rear reservoir that goes to the front was almost empty, so clearly someone was not watching it. I think I would be much more comfortable with one similar to the one you picked up. 3x the cost though is hard to swallow. Well not really, super important part.
 
Mattax said:
Yes and yes. I only posted that 1970 manual so you could see the combination block A/J had mentioned.
All of the A-bodies were considered compacts.
When the Cricket and later Colt, etc, were added to the line-up, I'm pretty sure those were called sub-compacts.

I checked what I paid from Kanter, (doing business as old.parts on ebay) it was just under $200. Still not cheap.

* I should mention there was a change in drum brake hardware starting in 1969. So definately use '69 and up references when working with the drum hardware and shoes.
Click to expand...

BTW, a few people on other forums that I showed the picture to said their opinion of that was it was a proportioning valve, I am asking them if they are SURE. All the paperwork you have graciously shared with me says they are wrong, even though I was hoping I would not have to add another 100$ part.
 
Mattax said:
Yes and yes. I only posted that 1970 manual so you could see the combination block A/J had mentioned.
All of the A-bodies were considered compacts.
When the Cricket and later Colt, etc, were added to the line-up, I'm pretty sure those were called sub-compacts.

I checked what I paid from Kanter, (doing business as old.parts on ebay) it was just under $200. Still not cheap.

* I should mention there was a change in drum brake hardware starting in 1969. So definately use '69 and up references when working with the drum hardware and shoes.
Click to expand...

Also, this car appears to be a factory 318, 4 speed, convertible. Someone added the 340HO later it appears, so maybe the K-H brakes were added after sale and they just had no clue and left the stock MC and did not add the PV? Anything is possible, wish I had a time machine.
 
dennisonwj said:
Okay, I will see what I can find one for, but the one I bought will work if I watch the fluid, huh? The one in there when I opened it, the rear reservoir that goes to the front was almost empty, so clearly someone was not watching it. I think I would be much more comfortable with one similar to the one you picked up. 3x the cost though is hard to swallow. Well not really, super important part.
Click to expand...
Well like I said, I drove it that way from the mid to late 1990s until 2017. At the time I needed it and that's all the parts store could get in. Driven everything but road courses. That's when I started looking seriously for the big resevoir. Road courses can use up brake pads so I wanted to be covered. Thats when the fluid goes down. (The pistons move out further) . Turns out the brakes pads were hardly used at all on that track - but that was as much a nature of the event and course as the brakes. I have no regrets about getting the proper master. But yes dont feel rushed.
 
dennisonwj said:
I looked at the fender tag and it does not list the codes for the brakes.
Click to expand...
I don't know enough about tags to offer more. It seems different years have slightly different info.
This one showed the power brake option, so I thought it was a possibility.
New Member... 69 Cuda 340 S Owner

Some people have been able to get the original IBM cards for their cars by writing Chrysler Historical.
 
Mattax said:
I don't know enough about tags to offer more. It seems different years have slightly different info.
This one showed the power brake option, so I thought it was a possibility.
New Member... 69 Cuda 340 S Owner

Some people have been able to get the original IBM cards for their cars by writing Chrysler Historical.
Click to expand...

My tag under the hood (on the fender shelf) is truncated, it does not have all the information on it. Is there another place in the '69 where a tag would exist?
 
dennisonwj said:
My tag under the hood (on the fender shelf) is truncated, it does not have all the information on it. Is there another place in the '69 where a tag would exist?
Click to expand...
I don't think so but not an area I'd considere myself an expert in. The IBM card may be your next best bet.

BTW it looks like at some of the repro companies carry the prop valve.
Inline Tube - The Professional Restorer No1 Choice

Ican't comment on their claim to being exclusive. Also I recall some people here may made their own sheet metal mounting brackets for them. I have an adustable one on my car so its a little different (not stock).
 
dennisonwj said:
BTW, a few people on other forums that I showed the picture to said their opinion of that was it was a proportioning valve, I am asking them if they are SURE. All the paperwork you have graciously shared with me says they are wrong, even though I was hoping I would not have to add another 100$ part.
Click to expand...
Inline Tube - The Professional Restorer No1 Choice
prop valve is listed at $49. I think I got mine a little cheaper on Ebay... maybe. with a little clip hanger.
if your distribution block had the prop valve in it, it would have the extra brass piece in the rear line port.
Inline Tube - The Professional Restorer No1 Choice
 
dennisonwj said:
Has anyone just replaced the distribution block in the a-body with the following? You will not need the extra Texas shaped proportioning valve.
Mopar 1 Piece Proportioning Valve
Click to expand...
I did not, only because of my previous re-piping of the 66 single to dual master cyl. Should fit right in to your 69 I believe. Not 100% on the fitting sizes.
 
snate66 said:
I did not, only because of my previous re-piping of the 66 single to dual master cyl. Should fit right in to your 69 I believe. Not 100% on the fitting sizes.
Click to expand...

Yeah I spoke with the folks at doctor diff and they said was modeled after the MOPAR 1973 design that incorporated the Texas shaped PV with the DB all in one piece. It is about an inch taller than the stock DB. The same upgrade model went into my 1988 Jeep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top