| Author | Message | ||
     Chris Miller Prolific User Username: cjm51213 Post Number: 147 Registered: 5-2013 |
Hi Folks, The low pressure return on the '72 emerges from the ACV as steel brake line but changes to hose clamped flexible line to make a 180 before it resumes life as steel brake line again. Some earlier owner apparently thought fuel line would work, and they were right; it did work for some time, but then it turned ugly...  I think everybody already knows this. However, for your consideration, Chris. | ||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 915 Registered: 6-2009 |
However, EPDM heater hose of the correct diameter is just fine. Brian | ||
| Chris Miller Prolific User Username: cjm51213 Post Number: 149 Registered: 5-2013 |
Hi Brian, Yeah... And that was what I used. An insight occurred to me the day I bought that hose. Coolant is a glycol compound as is brake fluid. It was as I asked myself why heater hose should be EPDM, when this occurred to me. For your consideration, Chris. | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.77 |
Flex low pressure dot hose 1/4 bore is available off the reel. 1/4 od copper pipe from plumbers shop Soft solder brass olive to pipe Ok for low pressure but I have run such a pipe at 1500 psi. It failed after a few hours, but got the boat home. Never use pure copper over say 200 psi. Copper with nickel will go to well over 3000 psi. Cupro-nickel is made for especially for brakes. £10s worth is enough to make all the solid 3/16 pipes. The two output pipes from pump are steel only because the I fitted cu-nic pipes and they split oafter about 1000 miles. FS £100 each. So be careful with these pipes. (Message approved by david_gore) | ||
| David Gore Moderator Username: david_gore Post Number: 1404 Registered: 4-2003 |
IMHO you cannot regard a 50% Glycol/50% water mixture as similar to a 100% Glycol fluid when comparing compatibility. This becomes even more important when operating temperatures are different; coolant can be as high as 90+ deg C whereas the brake fluid will be considerably lower. Manufacturer's recommendations regarding fluid compatibility must prevail at all times. The risk of prejudicing insurance coverage in the event of an accident associated with the use of non-specified materials is sufficient reason to comply with specified materials. | ||
| Chris Miller Prolific User Username: cjm51213 Post Number: 151 Registered: 5-2013 |
Of course you can. Glycol is glycol and glycol erodes nitrile. EPDM has higher chemical resistance to glycol, so heater hose is EPDM and brake seals are EPDM. Realizing that coolant is glycol leads to the conclusion that heater hose is EPDM. The light goes on! As far as insurance is concerned, after the determination of liability, the reason is not important. So, I'm driving and my brakes fail... Even if the reason is because I worked on them and made a mistake, that is not illegal and does not void insurance coverage; It's my car, I get to do with it as I like. If I am malicious and I cause an accident intentionally, that is a different story because that's criminal. not civil, but accidents happen and if they didn't there would be no need for insurance at all. For your consideration, Chris. | ||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 917 Registered: 6-2009 |
I shall simply note that every reference I can find to EPDM, whether for hosing or seals, says that it is fine for glycol brake fluids and for hot applications involving water or steam up to about 120° C. One need not guess that heater hose is EPDM (or at least not the brand I bought) as it's clearly marked. I wanted to be certain of material compatibility with brake fluid. The two places where we're talking about EPDM heater hose being used in the brake/hydraulic system of a RR/Bentley are "no pressure" gravity feed lines and very low pressure fluid return lines. EPDM is consistently specified for use with glycol and glycol solutions on every chemical compatibility sheet I've ever seen for the stuff. I can only say that the use of EPDM hosing that is specifically manufactured as "heater hose" in low/no pressure situations where glycol or glycol solutions are involved has been standard operating procedure pretty much forever (in the US at least). It certainly meets the chemical compatibility and temperature range requirements of the applications it's being used in on a RR/Bentley brake system. Brian | ||
| David Gore Moderator Username: david_gore Post Number: 1405 Registered: 4-2003 |
Chris and Brian, You have overlooked the point I was trying to make which was to avoid making assumptions and do the necessary research to obtain the right information. I was not making any reference to the suitability or otherwise of EPDM products whatsoever. Chris, your comments re faulty repairs not jeopardising insurance coverage are not valid in Australia and it is my understanding this also applies in other countries as well. Repairs by unqualified individuals have resulted in insurers refusing to pay out on claims for accidents causing personal injury and/or property damage on the grounds the person undertaking the repairs assumed liability for the outcome as the insurer was not responsible for authorising and/or inspecting the work undertaken by non-licensed entities. The owner then becomes personally responsible for paying the costs and recovering the costs from any third parties involved in the repairs. This is why professionals undertaking mechanical repairs have to be licenced and carry liability insurance to protect them from claims arising from their work. | ||
| Bob Reynolds Prolific User Username: bobreynolds Post Number: 126 Registered: 8-2012 |
"So, I'm driving and my brakes fail... Even if the reason is because I worked on them and made a mistake, that is not illegal and does not void insurance coverage" It certainly IS illegal if you've made the car unroadworthy (whether knowingly or not). And don't forget that insurers will try any way they can to avoid paying out. I don't know about yours, but my policy says that the car must be maintained in a roadworthy condition. Ok, mechanical failures happen; but if the cause can be attributed to shoddy maintenance or a DIY bodge, then you would be in trouble - especially if you've killed someone. | ||
| Chris Miller Prolific User Username: cjm51213 Post Number: 152 Registered: 5-2013 |
Hi David, Bob, We'll have to attribute this disagreement to "cultural differences". In the U.S., it works the way I said. There is no license requirement for mechanics, which means I can do what ever I want. Well, that's not exactly true, there is a license requirement if you are fixing someone else's car, but not your own. Insurance policies are not permitted those sorts of escapes, because they are far too quickly abused and lead to untold litigation. "What? You were wearing red shoe laces? Well, we here at ABC Automotive think that caused the accident and we will not pay your claim. You are going to have to shell out a pile of money and take us to court to make us pay." Chris. | ||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 918 Registered: 6-2009 |
David, And my point, in this specific instance, is that I had already done my homework (and that's my typical practice where anything safety critical is concerned [even otherwise]). Also, what I offered has been offered by many, and reasonably often, with the full history and research mentioned before so I don't feel the need to repeat "the full history and research" except when seemingly directly challenged on it. I do have to say that there are distinct legal and cultural differences with regard to licensing of mechanics and "usual and customary" practice of insurance companies between the U.S. and the Commonwealth Countries. As far as mechanics go what Chris says is pretty much true in many venues. "Mom & Pop" mechanics set up shop on a routine basis with nothing more than a business license. Some states, such as California and Michigan, "micro-license" to the level of whether you are certified to work on automatic versus manual transmissions, can do automotive HVAC work, etc. Texas, New Jersey, and Florida have no licensing requirements beyond business licenses (see here - links to state websites are in the references on that article). It also seems that vehicle inspection programs are far, far more stringent for Commonwealth Countries than for the U.S. There are a number of states that do not even have state safety inspections, there are no federal safety inspections for personal automobiles, and even most safety inspection programs don't go "as deep or as picky" as the MOT inspections appear to do. When I've seen posts about what a brake inspection protocol is required for MOT you could have knocked me over with a feather. In any state I've lived in so far a brake check during safety inspection amounts to "are the pads sufficiently thick , do the brakes apply when the pedal is pressed (these first two generally checked on only one wheel), do the brake lights also come on." It is extremely uncommon for U.S. automobile insurance companies to "pick through the carcass" of vehicles involved in accidents unless there are some really exceptional circumstances. Even when there are equipment failures it's generally quite difficult to determine "who last touched that, and when" in the majority of instances. When I got SRH33576 it turned out that the system 1 brakes were effectively not functioning but someone had either accidentally or intentionally disconnected the warning light wiring in the engine bay. I had no way of knowing this (at the time) and thought something "was peculiar" but there was no way for a new purchaser and RR neophyte to confirm that. Had an accident occurred it's virtually impossible that I could have been held liable since, as a driver of a new-to-me vehicle, there was no obvious sign that anything was amiss. When the mechanic that discovered the disconnected connection found it, he even said to me that it was not obvious whether this was intentional or accidental. I doubt anyone could ever have determined who actually did that disconnecting and I was insured to drive the car as "presumed roadworthy." It will probably make some jaws drop but here in Virginia cars that have antique license plates are not even subject to annual safety inspections. I now have three cars with antique plates, including my daily driver, and take safety quite seriously. The law presumes, and pretty securely based on statistics, that antique/classic car owners are far less likely to have accidents with those cars or to allow them to be unsafe to operate. Brian | ||
| David Gore Moderator Username: david_gore Post Number: 1406 Registered: 4-2003 |
Remind me never to drive in the USA in future - what you posted above horrifies me. Here in NSW, we have compulsory annual vehicle inspections for cars more than 5 years old and these inspections get more rigorous as the vehicles age in an effort to get older vehicles off the road as many owners skimp on or cannot afford maintenance. My 21 year old 4WD gets a thorough inspection for everything from oil leaks to critical safety items such as brakes, steering, suspension and body corrosion. Inspectors who pass vehicles subsequently found defective after an accident or during a routine Police "pull over" can lose their licence to inspect vehicles if they knowingly approved a defective vehicle. Classic and Historic cars are permitted to be driven for Car Club events and other approved trips on special Club plates however they are also subject to roadworthiness inspections commensurate with their age and construction. Our Police have a specialist crash investigation section which investigates and documents major incidents and all fatalities; roads are often closed for several hours whilst the on-site investigation is carried out and the vehicles are then taken to a workshop where they are forensically examined to determine whether vehicle condition and maintenance have contributed to the accident. Insurance companies have used the findings of these investigations to deny liability where owner neglect/failure to properly maintain the vehicle has been determined as a contributing cause to the accident. In minor incidents where Police are called, they do a basic check of the vehicles for obvious defects and issue infringement notices when appropriate. Insures obtain copies of the Police Incident Reports as standard practice when a claim is lodged and accept/deny liability as appropriate based on the information in these reports. | ||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 919 Registered: 6-2009 |
David, It seems a reminder shan't be necessary if what I posted above horrifies you. We don't seem to have a statistically significant problem with cars being involved in accidents secondary to lack of roadworthiness. Presuming that the chart on this webpage on states requiring inspections is accurate it appears that far more states than I'd presumed, 31, do not require them at all, 32 if you include the District of Columbia. Substantially the same information appears on a wikipedia page on vehicle inspections [multiple types]. There have, in fact, been discussions in a number of states about possibly doing away with annual safety inspections as those states that have them don't seem to fare any better than those that don't. One could argue this on the basis of how stringent the inspections are, but some are very stringent while others are far less so. It all seems to "come out in the wash" as far as statistical analysis goes. This has been the system in the United States where car culture is king "since dirt." We don't seem to be dying in droves secondary to issues with roadworthiness of vehicles. While I have no problem with safety inspections and have lived in three states that have them I am really grateful that we don't have the local constabulary picking through every miserable detail of every automobile accident. There is always examination of accidents where there are fatalities, but most of that focuses on determining the sequence of immediately proximal events that caused them. All signs point to most automobile accidents being the result of operator error, not equipment failure. The only incidents I can recall where forensic analysis of the vehicle(s) themselves has been undertaken is if there is a suspicion of tampering to make a vehicle fail. The information you've offered has made the proverbial lightbulb go on as far as why certain attitudes toward automobile safety differ quite widely in different western nations. Just as you can't imagine "our system" and are horrified, I can't imagine dealing with what seems, to me, to be the oppressiveness of yours. It comes down to what you've been raised with, what you expect, and what you believe about the costs and benefits of each. I now also understand why there are such extreme differences regarding concerns about what is a reasonable possibility after an automobile accident occurs. Different strokes, etc. Brian | ||
| Omar M. Shams Grand Master Username: omar Post Number: 418 Registered: 4-2009 |
Dear All, We have all had our rants now so may I please interject as a neautral party and say this: We are all grown men and know what is right from wrong. Let us keep the discussions on fixing our cars and please let us put all our legal/cultural discussions to one side. I have a lot of respect for all the gentlemen who have been discussing this issue and other parallel threads on this forum about legal positions in different countries. we are classic car enthusiasts and we all have that in common. Let us keep the discussions with that focus and stay safe and happy. enjoy your Rolls-Royces and Bentleys. Omar | ||
| Brian Vogel Grand Master Username: guyslp Post Number: 920 Registered: 6-2009 |
Omar Shams wrote, in part: We are all grown men and know what is right from wrong. Let us keep the discussions on fixing our cars and please let us put all our legal/cultural discussions to one side. You know I have nothing but respect for you, and for virtually all "the regulars" here. I also agree entirely with your first sentence. This is one of the reasons I don't believe, at all, in trying to "shut down" discussions that have not devolved into nothing but personal attacks. I found the recent thread drift most instructive. It hasn't turned ugly, those who feel the need to vent have done so, and the world goes on. It certainly has made clear why certain attitudes that I've often wondered about prevail: the circumstances warrant those attitudes where they prevail. I knew nothing about those circumstances before. I do wish, though, that all forums (not just this one, but others I've participated in as well) had an "Other Topics" topic. These sorts of discussions should, ideally, be started there or, when they occur as thread drift, be shifted there. Those that do have this sort of area tend to suffer less from extended thread drift upon thread drift upon thread drift. Brian | ||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3039 Registered: 4-2003 |
This thread, along with a concurrent thread, has turned to bemusing themes. This is a public forum, and an observer could be confused. Are we talking about keeping a 50 year old Victa motor strapped to an irrigation pump running long after it should have been replaced ? No. We are discussing the intricacies of very superior motor cars and how to maintain them in truly excellent condition. There is no room for second rate spare parts for a start. Your spares suppliers for these cars are second to none. Order a spring for a MkVI door jamb or a brake rotor for an Arnage alike and it is on the shelf at a very reasonable price. Try that for a Trabant or a Jaguar. In fact, Jag and Aston owners are sourcing some spares from the Crewe spares outlets these days as the parts common to R-R/B cars are available and very cost effective compared to their own channels. The best way to keep this amazing source of spares viable is to buy the spares from our dedicated suppliers. Sure you may often buy a substitute o-ring from a hardware store. It may do the job, and your Crewe supplier will not cry over the loss of a $2 sale. The same applies to a low-pressure accumulator hose. These outfits carry o-rings as a service, and would gladly drop these nuisance products except that it is part of the full spares availability philosophy. Taking an order for two o-rings and despatching them has to be the most hideous sale. You can buy a brand new coolant pump (not rebuilt, no exchange) for an S2-S3 Bentley out of a box with a 2 year warranty for just $700. If you think about it, to have such a noble spare available for a 55 year old car is remarkable. If you then decide to make your own gasket for $2 instead of buying one for $6 to fit the pump it beggars belief. Besides, it will void the warranty. Then comes workmanship. The degeneration of topics to how to fit the wrong part in the flimsiest manner speaks for itself. Let’s refocus on how to do a job properly and who can do it for us when it is not within our capabilities. Our cars were exceptionally well built in the first place. There is a handful of improvements worthy of making. However, keeping these cars in fine condition usually relies on the correct spares and workmanship rather than rude compromises. RT. | ||
| Geoff Wootton Grand Master Username: dounraey Post Number: 443 Registered: 5-2012 |
Hi Folks I've moved house again and have been off the net for a week. It's been great to catch up with the interesting recent threads. I've lived in the UK where they have an MOT test similar to the one David describes for Australia and also in the US where there is no test (for most states). Having experienced both countries I am unequivocally in favour of the US system. I think the big issue here is one of conditioning. In the UK it is natural to have your 3 year+ car mechanically tested for your own and other peoples safety. It is just accepted as the responsible thing to do and no-one ever actually questions whether it is really necessary. Come to the US where there is no test and you find that there is no difference. The idea that cars in the US are badly maintained, that wheels are falling off and brakes failing is simply not true. In the 10 years I have been here I have never seen a car go out of control due to a mechanical failure. I know this is anecdotal but my observations are borne out by the chart Brian refers to. I have no doubt that if the lack of an MOT test was impacting road safety then the US government would act. I guess you have to experience driving in the US to understand that their lack of vehicle testing is not an issue for road safety. Geoff | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.93 |
In the UK there is no licencing arrangements for mechanics. But the law will assume that a mechanic because he say he is is, and therefore is an expert and therefore must have known that it was improper to repair the brakes in such a manner. I have been an expert witness and a barrister would shred that notion in seconds. (no licencing arrangements) Ignorance of the law is no excuse Read insurance small print. In the UK insurance will cover third party but if the insured has lied or behaved in a dangerous manner such as gluing rivets to hold back a 1000psi, then the insurance company will pursue the policy holder. Do you own a house will be the first question. A diyer would also be considered as a mechanic de facto. I have seen a barrister in action and they will make gluing a rivet sound heinous. When I worked for the police, a copper smashed up a car. He said the brakes went. I and 2 others forensically examined the brakes and found nothing wrong. Because he injured someone the case went to court and because he lied he lost his job and driving licence. The point of this story is that if an accident occurs someone like me will examine the car if the driver says the brakes have failed then the cause will be found and prosecutions will result if lash ups are found that caused the accident. Vladimir may explain the legal bit better. Ignoring the above it is anti social behavior to not take care of others. (Message approved by david_gore) | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.79 |
Hand tight is ***king stupid. Stop every 10 miles to check for leaks or nip the accs with strap to not quite as tight as a wheel nut It says 50 to 60 ftlbs in the book this is easy to achieve and takes no time at all. If the accs are hand tight then why not leave the wheel loose as well And leave the nut on the steering wheel loose I could go further but I don't want to be any ruder. Fortunately most Americans are sensible and not dumb and dumber. (Message approved by david_gore) | ||
| Bill Coburn Moderator Username: bill_coburn Post Number: 1535 Registered: 4-2003 |
There is an underlying mischievous thread in much of this writing which worries me. For those that don't bore easily I want to tell you that a friend of my mother handed over her 1949 Vauxhall Velox a neat 6 cylinder sedan to let me decarbonise the combustion chambers. I was 14 years old! In those days when petrol in this country was still rationed, the stuff that was sold was little better than kerosine. The result was combustion chambers that needed a chimney sweep rather than a mechanic! After reading every detail I could about the job I removed the head, cleaned the valves refitted the lot and adjusted the tappets. That car was still running nicely some 20 years later! Now sometimes in my dotage, I shudder to think what I could have buggered up, but I didn't. In my school holidays I used to cycle across the town to a general garage to work with mechanics as 'a boy'. I was incidentally, not sexually assaulted despite being a cute lad! I bought many cars later in my teens and made many mistakes working on them but never had a real disaster. My first Crewe product was a 1951 Silver Dawn in pieces which I stripped to the chassis frame, had it strengthened to match the later R Type and put it back together. The rest is history as is the saying. When I was posted to the States in the late sixties, I found a meet in Alexandria - a suburb in Arlington Va across the river from DC. I then joined the RROC of America - my first car club and lo cars started arriving at my door. The subsequent experiences - all pleasurable, will go in the book. I also started to write, first in the Flying Lady and on my repatriation to OZ joined the local Club and bought the Dawn. The last purchase was an olympic leap for me, so the first task apart from enlarging my garage, placating my children and sedating my wife was to get information. It was comparable to trying to get the detailed index to the Dead Sea Scrolls! The quest that followed was the subject for yet another book!! But I won eventually. The Dawn still motors in Queensland! Clearly (to me) the survival of the cars was a corporate determination to preserve them. At the time even a Mk VI was fairly expensive and many a young enthusiast had to be placed under sedation when advised of the apochrypha of costs ahead of him if he contemplated a purchase and restoration. Available cars in those days had not uncommonly suffered rounding up sheep in open paddocks and driven over roads (tracks) especially selected for the first Redex Trial (Google that you young ones!). Attempts to get members of my new Club (perforce in Sydney as the Australian Capital Terriotory did not have a Branch and the Club Constitution did not permit one to be formed), were met with considerable resistance. Having owners it seemed, groping around the mechanical intestines of these vaunted vehicles, was akin to questioning the veracity of thr New Testament! The agents and few entrepreneurs vigourously defended their territory understandably from a business perceptive. The idea of losing business to do-it-youselfers, was scotched very smartly, eventually, by a very practical and capable business-man steeped solely in Rolls-Royce and Bentley cars, who opined that 'if they do the work and bugger it up they will come to us to fix it!' Gradually new owners took on the job of their own repairs and restoration. With the help of a trio of entrepreneurs, all the manuals of extant cars were published on the site you are now viewing. This was not without trauma. A select group decided to sabotage another excellent site by writing absolute nonsense and obscene insults to the point where it was closed down by the owner - 'why would he bother'. These initiatives still continue to varying degrees. The nub of all these ramblings is that one of the large RR Clubs had a member who had decided that he would not pay the price asked for an engine oil filter for his then very new Shadow. He devised a scheme whereby using the filter from another car and trnsferring part of the original to it he had a working replacement. As I recall two owners tried the scheme and were quite satisfied until the conversion failed! The result was the modiofied units failed apparently blocked off the oil supply and two fairly new engines were destroyed. The legal fraternity predictably went into full throttle, the relevant Club disowned the modification and probably the owners and the good news was that the Factory replaced both engines! The memory of this calamity I believe spread world wide and was responsible for the almost total stop to the flow of informal information that might help people keep cars on the road. We have come a long way in the last forty plus years. The information available to the world on our cars is without equal. Most moving and proactive is the participation of clearly professional operators who for reasons I cannot fathom are prepared to share their experience and advice on this Forum pro bono! But now the cautionary thrusts are re-appearing, justifiably may I opine, where modifications and alternatives are touted often with remarkable authority. The message to the would be RR-on-a -shoestring adventurers, is that if you can't afford even the reasonable suggested alternatives, please be cautious in advocating apparent absurd solutions lest some unsuspecting viewer accepts the suggestion in good faith and disaster follows. | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.83 |
Originally this thread started about dot flexible hose and it can be replaced by water hose because they are both glycol base. Maybe water hose will work. But dot hose is different because it has DOT in bold letters written on it. I could understand if dot hose was expensive or hard to get It probably the same price of water hose. The car had fuel hose instead of dot which failed so water hose is used instead of the correct stuff. Then the hand tight bit. I have been engineering stuff for 50 years and I do take note that stuff will probably have to be stripped for repair and bear it in mind Never once has ever occurred to me to leave something handtight that the makers have specifically given torque figure. Neither has any of the many engineers I have met. I have had many conversations about are all the bolts tight but never ignore the book and leave it hand tight mate. Many times I have left stuff not tight enough because I have a problem and unsure exactly what But when the jobs sorted last thing is to give all the screw bits a nip to the correct torque. Sometimes it is unimportant such as a trim screw and enough to hold it good enough. Basic working practice (Message approved by david_gore) | ||
| Jan Forrest Grand Master Username: got_one Post Number: 567 Registered: 1-2008 |
With very few exceptions - which will (should?) be specified in the workshop manual - virtually all nuts and bolt torque figures can be guesstimated reasonably closely by head size. It's no accident that the smaller the head size, the shorter the length of a fixed aperture spanner. One good hand swing on the free end should be quite close enough unless you're severely disabled/weakened or are Arnold Shwarzenegger! Obviously this does not apply to fixed length ratchet handles and sockets, which is where the ubiquitous torque wrench comes into the picture. IIRC there's one fairly large nut lurking somewhere in a Shadow that requires just a few inch/Lbs of torque, but that is definitely in a very small minority. | ||
| Richard Treacy Grand Master Username: richard_treacy Post Number: 3043 Registered: 4-2003 |
Where have the Australian contributors gone ? Has „der Rattensänger von Hameln“ (The Pied Piper of Hamelin) spirited us all away to to oblivion ? Books, manuals and science seem to have given way to finger-tight guesswork and fairytales. Following the instructions of the designers is, arguably, a wisdom in the absence of any established or researched deviation. Ask a craftsman how to assemble a Hubelin or an IWC with a torque wrench and he will scream. RT. | ||
| Chris Miller Prolific User Username: cjm51213 Post Number: 170 Registered: 5-2013 |
Hi Folks, I posted this picture as a warning of the consequences of ignoring the details. In this case, someone used fuel line where brake fluid could impair the integrity of the line and it did so. The damage was obvious and compelling enough, and the lesson simple enough, that I thought it warranted some "Show and Tell". I also thought it pretty innocuous and I am astonished by the claims, counter-claims, accusations, and topic migration! This thread has migrated over a wide variety of unrelated topics, and probably has lost much of its benefit. Too bad. The message is short and sweet. Brake fluid? EPDM elastomer. So, restating the intent of the original post: Use EPDM elastomer in the presence of glycol. Brake fluid is a glycol solution. Coolent is also a glycol solution. This means that "heater hose" is perfectly chemically compatible with brake fluid applications. Physical constraints (read that "pressure, size, &c.") are not addressed by the mere constituent of EPDM and require different properties. Heater hose will probably burst under most Rolls Royce brake fluid applications, but I don't know because I haven't tried it and it doesn't matter because nobody advocates using heater hose for high pressure brake applications. The other main topic discussed here, is a migration from a different post, and probably should have stayed with that post since cross-posting to this topic abandons the associated context and makes the thread much harder to follow across multiple posts. But, since it has happened, and I can only point out the shift, not correct it, I also have a comment. A map is not a goal (unless you are a cartographer..); a map is a means to an end. That end is getting to your destination and obviously you must know what your destination is. Similarly, a torque spec is not a goal; a torque spec is a means to an end. That end is "accomplishments desired", like for example "fixing position" or "containing fluids" and "defects avoided" like for example "re-positioning", "broken components" or "leaks". The torque spec is subordinate to a specific mechanical destination. You don't get more karma for more torque. Apparently this is not well understood given the howling. For your consideration, Chris. | ||
| Randy Roberson Prolific User Username: wascator Post Number: 265 Registered: 5-2009 |
Brake fluid=EPDM. Gasoline=Nitrile. In general. | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.87 |
I use dot marked hose because it says use this for lp dot applications. End of. One can endlessly discuss interesting alternatives. But don't use unless brain eating zombies are trying get you. I can out bodge anybody. (Message approved by david_gore) |
