RR363 and dot 3/4

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message   Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.77 Posted on Saturday, 28 June, 2014 - 10:53 am:    RR363 has an additive package that lubricates the pump which are pushed up by the cam and returned by spring and hydraulic back pressure Dot 4 is for abs pumps the plungers are pushed in and out by a swash plate typically Dot 4 has a habit of leaving a sticky thin film when left no moving the stickiness goes as soon as the fluid moves Sort of static sticky friction The action is weak and easily overcome by the swash plate The return spring on RR pumps maynot be strong enough to return the piston if by chance the engine is not run for Say 3 months and the plunger is at the top of.stroke RR363 prevents this and the additives are more oily If this happens proceed as follows Remove out let pipe Remove adaptor Remove non return valve remove flat disk Super.double.extra careful using slender parrarel punch hand push the top of.the plunger down Engine cam may need to be moved by a.flick.on the starter No hammers verboten Once the plunger is down then inlet port will open dot fills the bore Reassemble Flat disk If marked on under side turn over I know this because I ran my shadow on dot 4 for about 6 months in the.early nineties and then stored for.4 months no 1 pump jammed and no. 1 brake not working RR said RR363.formulated to combat such eventualities Notice combat.not cure Dot 3 is virtually unobtainable in the UK however it can be used for flush test emergency situations as can dot 4 Original the system was.dot 3 and main problems was caused by girling red fluid being used and maintenance errors new car blues Although the problem was largely wrong maintenance RR came up with the first RR363 oil and naturally as dot oils improved so did RR363 Ford would have blamed the stupid owner RR said our fault Castrol is on the case }} (Message approved by david_gore)   Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.83 Posted on Wednesday, 02 July, 2014 - 08:26 am:    In my original posting I omitted LHM There is no difference in the dot and OHM hydraulic BRAKE system Except seals and hoses and no master cylinder like the SY 2 The rear suspension of LHM cars is difference earliest was corniche 1979 LHM is mineral oil and green as is the tank and accumulators and rear spheres for identity Dot combats moisture by combining with water to form a mixture that doesn't corrode after a while the moisture content will increase to unacceptable levels and should be changed LHM combats moisture by forming a homogenous mixture which is different from chemical mixture Given time the water will settle out and go to the lowest point it can Again there are limits and regular bleeding of cul du sacs is recommended once a year say at the service time with a full oil.change say 2 years The only way to remove water from dot is by boiling the.water off the water will not drop out like lhm The main reason for lhm is that lhm works better than dot for suspension Plus Citroen had been using lhm for Years with no problem thus allying the fears that a mineral wouldnt be ok There is any advantage in either fluid is arguable and I would just go with whatever the car is designed with and not consider changing over either way Emergency substitutes for LHM are many auto trans oil skydrol engine oil and diesel mix JCB hyd oil hydraulic oil in general Avoid creosote (Message approved by david_gore)