<VV> [FC] Springs for "working" Rampside (Now Brakes)

[Bill & Chris Strickland]

We operated a small fleet of [often overloaded] commercial trucks in the 
early 1980's near Oregon City, OR, which has an 500 foot elevation 
change.  Going downhill, and catching a few too many stoplights was an 
issue. We solved it with full metallic brake linings, at considerable 
expense, but being able to stop at the bottom of the hill was worth it!

Bill

On 5/17/2015 10:45 AM, RoboMan91324 at aol.com wrote:
> Bill,
> What you wrote is absolutely correct.  I did mention a dual cylinder 
> in my first post but failed to raise the red flag on brakes anywhere 
> nearly as high as you did. Bravo.  Both on and off list, a number of 
> people who responded on this train bragged about their FCs' ability to 
> carry a load uphill.  You brought to light the danger of carrying that 
> load downhill.  Yes, skidding off a cliff is much worse than replacing 
> and engine.
> I don't know if I would call myself obsessed with the engine as the 
> weak link.  I merely submitted a series of responses.  After Hank's 
> initial question, the subject changed from suspension load to the 
> engine and that is where it stayed; until now.  If it can be said that 
> I have obsessed on the engine, you could call me guilty of serial 
> obsession.  Over the years, I have "obsessed" over tire safety, fans, 
> engines most recently and, yes, brakes among other things.
> Perhaps the highest value of VV is the tips and advice on safety 
> issues.  Your topic more than mine is a shining example of that.  
> These topics have great value to the "newbies" but also for those who 
> feel they are "old hands" at the idiosyncrasies of our Corvairs.  Many 
> do not give their brakes a thought until it is too late.
> Something implied but not discussed in your statement is the subject 
> of brake fade.  This nasty brake issue may allow false confidence 
> until it raises its ugly head and then it is too late.  Here is the 
> scenario....  As you say, brakes of the 60s are poor by today's 
> standards. They were considered adequate at the time but under certain 
> conditions could fail even when new.  Most of us do not drive our 
> vehicles as if we were in competition.  Econo-Runs don't count.  :-)  
> Without getting too far into the physics, the braking process 
> basically turns the kinetic energy of a vehicle in motion into heat 
> energy in the brakes as it slows down.  You may have seen the glow of 
> cherry red brakes shining from beneath a Formula 1 race car on TV as 
> it brakes into a curve.  Those brakes were designed and built with "no 
> cost spared" to handle the heat.  For the brakes to be used repeatedly 
> or for a single lengthy use, they must dissipate heat from the 
> previous braking event.  Our standard brakes are poor at this.  If you 
> have an emergency stop, the brakes will probably work fine if they are 
> in good condition. Several emergency stops in quick succession are 
> another matter.  The brakes get very hot and can fail.  I was involved 
> in a discussion some time back about replacing our standard steel 
> drums with aluminum drums with cooling fins. From a fade perspective, 
> this is a vast improvement over the stock brakes though still not 
> anywhere near the performance of disk brakes.  The main point is that 
> you may go along for years with only "normal" braking duty which is 
> perfectly adequate.  This could give you false confidence in your 
> brakes.  Then one day, you decide to load up the old Rampside to 
> deliver the load down in the valley.  You think, "I will be driving 
> downhill with the load and uphill without the load.  No problem."  You 
> could consider those downhill conditions to be an extended 
> semi-emergency braking experience.  Your perfectly good "normal 
> driving" experience has now become your worst nightmare.  By the way, 
> big-rig drivers learn early in their careers to use a low gear in 
> their trannys on downhill grades to use "engine braking" to relieve 
> some heat buildup in the brakes.  This is a significant concern for 
> FCs but also cars.  It is especially the case with a fully loaded FC.
> On the subject of salt air and the effects on cars over time, I 
> completely agree.  To expand; salt air is bad for steel vehicles and 
> components but merely humid air is also bad.  Worst of all is an 
> environment where vehicles are driven in the winter in a state that 
> uses road salt.  I used to live in Minnesota where they use salt.  I 
> remember looking at an old El Camino and the seller used the fact that 
> it was a North Dakota vehicle as a selling point. I asked why and he 
> told me it was a good thing because North Dakota used cinders instead 
> of salt on the roads.  If you are in a dry hot state, you still need 
> to check things out. I am in a warm state now but I own a Canadian 
> Corsa.  I don't know how much of its life was spent in Canada. Arizona 
> is known to be quite dry and hot but that vehicle may have spent its 
> life in the Arizona mountains with a very different environment.
> Bill, thanks for pointing out the larger issue.  Perhaps this will 
> encourage a train of responses on brake issues.  Hopefully.
> Like previous posts, I have included this response on VV as well 
> because this is an issue for both cars and FCs.
> Doc
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In a message dated 5/17/2015 9:05:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
> corvanatics-request at corvair.org writes:
>
>     Message: 1
>     Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 10:55:07 -0700
>     From: Bill & Chris  Strickland <lechevrier at q.com>
>     To: corvanatics at corvair.org
>     Subject: Re: [FC] Springs for "working" Rampside
>     Message-ID: <5557847B.6030406 at q.com>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
>     Yes, Doc, Newbies need to be educated in the ways of their
>     Corvair. But as such, you haven't even mentioned the Big Safety
>     Factor that could lead to physical injury. Brakes.
>
>     A 1 ton load in an FC with tires so rated is a hazard with stock
>     brakes.  And to further digress, our common usage load rating
>     system (? & ? ton) is grossly unrealistic and was so in the
>     sixties.One simply can not compare the load carrying capacity of a
>     Corvair truck to that of a 1 ton dual wheeled truck of
>     conventional manufacture, which in the sixties, also had woefully
>     inadequate brakes.
>
>     But that was then, and this is now. Those 9,000 pound 1 ton diesel
>     behemoths have rather spectacular brakes, and not just for their
>     size. Since this is no longer the sixties, things have changed,
>     especially highways and speed limits.  Very few Corvairs, and
>     other cars of the sixties that are being driven in regular usage
>     still have their original engines.  It's not a big deal to expect
>     that any replacement engine in an FC is an upgrade to the
>     original, so most FC's already have that upgraded power plant.
>
>     What isn't a somewhat automatic upgrade is the brakes, which
>     weren't really good back when it was 55 mph speeds, let alone what
>     folks are driving on the freeways these days. And if you want to
>     talk loads", it gets much worse -- the engine will still work, but
>     the brakes won't!
>
>     And, I think, Doc lives in Florida, a small peninsula surrounded
>     by salt water.  I would think that undercarriage inspection (and
>     perhaps testing and repair) would be common place for a Floridian
>     FC, a unibody FC without a heavy steel frame under it, and a good
>     practice in general for any old FC, and they are all "old".
>
>     Doc seems obsessed with the engine, but to put an FC in regular
>     service, it seems to me there are any number of other things to
>     obsess over before the engine.  If the engine blows up, so what --
>     quite likely there were no lives lost.  But brakes, frame, or
>     other structural failure, even inadequate defrosters can lead to
>     unexpected consequences. Without power brakes and power steering,
>     a Corvair is fairly immune to drastic consequences related to
>     engine failures (fire would be an exception), whereas loss of
>     vehicle control due to loosing a rear axle because of bearing
>     failure would be a far more serious and potentially dangerous
>     situation. If an engine blows, you call for a tow, and pay the man
>     - happened to one of the Ultra owners on our NW Econo-Run a couple
>     years ago - stuff happens, and like a good Boy Scout, "Be
>     Prepared". No ambulance needed.
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Bill Strickland
>