Hey guys,
I am converting the Heavy Chevy from drums to discs but really dont like the looks of a booster on the firewall. How bad is the pedal pressure on non power discs ? Any worse than the non power drums are ?
Thanks in advance,

if you think about how the disc brakes feel on an older 73-on up pick up truck that does not have power disc brakes
I would think it probably wouldn't be much different than drums on a chevelle
I guess what I'm trying to say is about the same as you drum setup
I wouldn't think there would be much difference

If I recall, the booster makes a nice difference. I used a small booster on my 65. Where did you get your spindles?

Jay,
I found one nice used and one NOS spindle on E-bay. Less than $80 for both of them. I got 2 Bendix reman calipers and 2 new Bendix rotors and am still thinking about whether to get repop backing plates, or try to find some NOS ones. I also need one caliper bracket.

I converted my '66 using single piston caliper set up from post '68 Chevelle, but chose not to use a booster. I like it, but my only concern was the stopping, not the effort necessary to accomplish it. After 27 years, I'm pretty used to manual brakes, I did have a small diameter booster on it for a while, when it still had 4 wheel drum. Honestly, if I had to compare it to power brakes found on newer cars, I would say it more resembled manual brakes anyway. Probably, moreso due to low vacuum, than booster diameter.

The manual discs don't require near the effort or the distance to stop. Plus, the occasional drive on flooded streets isn't a total crapshoot. I highly recommend it if you intend on taking your car to the strip. A couple of runs right after each other with drum brakes, the turn around at the end comes and goes pretty quickly. Nothin' like, "Sphinctor Palates" while you fenders are burnin' on the guardrail posts.

I also changed over my 66 to 70 Chevelle spindles,roters and calipers but I did not use a booster. I was going by an old Magazine article that gave all the part numbers to use and it suggested a dual non power master cylinder for a 74 Camaro. I ordered that master and I run an adjustable Prop valve and the system works great.

For a long time I ran factory discs with a 15/16" bore master cylinder, manual. Pedal stroke and effort were very reasonable-- the setup worked GREAT. If your calipers lend themselves to it, manual is the way to go IMO, and the factory calipers with their large piston area work mint as manuals.

BTW, you can pick up the 15/16" bore MC for a 77 Malibu with manual brakes. You will have to do some linework as the 77 MC is reversed; the front port/reservoir is for the rear brakes, and the rear port is for the front brakes.

Troy

Bill, Thanks for asking the non booster question, I am doing the same conversion as you are as we speak on my 66, just like you I do not like the looks of a booster under the hood. fully realizing what thay can do for braking. I also appreciate the comments from everyone above. I am going non booster, have been driving this thing for over 39 years with 4 wheel drums so I hope the disc are an improvement stopping wise. We will see I guess.

Jesse

Thanks for the replys,
I will probably try it without the booster and see how it is. My Wife also loves driving the car so I would like to make it a bit easier to stop as we are all used to power discs on all the new cars. I can always add the booster later.
Rowdy ... I ran the Chevelle pretty regularly in the 70's before I built my 67 Camaro "real" race car. The Chevelle ran pretty consistant 12.50's at around 105mph and really never had a problem stopping with the manual drums. I did have the old Lakewood metallic shoes on it. They were terrible when cold but actually stopped pretty decently once warmed up.

When I converted to discs, I stayed with manual brakes.

There are two holes on the pedal arm for the brake push rod. One is for manual, one for power. When you swap over to discs (once you get the right master) just keep the original hole.

The reason that power brakes feel hard when they have no vacuum is because the push rod is installed in the other hole.

I had manual disc's on my 72 4 door and it was harder to stop than a well setup drum system.I went with non-metallic pads and it stopped a little better.Went to power booster and won't go back to manual.

I recently re-installed a brake booster in my car. My car was being converted to a 80/20 race/street car when I got it. The previous owner removed the booster probably do to low vacume from the previous engine. The pedal was extremely hard without the booster. I got used to it. But my sons 14 and 11 help me move the car around from time to time when we do repairs and/or upgrades. The 11 year old could barely get it to stop. Now it's stops about as good or better than my 5000+ pound Lincoln Navigator.
If I didn't like the looks of it I'd probably install one of the smaller ones or paint it black. But I have no regrets and only wished I had done it sooner.
By the way standard discs in the front and drums on the rear. JMHO

Bill,
I also used the 77 Malibu master with the 15/16 piston, everything else stock with a combination valve from a 72. The master was under 30.00 if I remember correctly. The good thing about this master is it works with the stock manual drum rod.

I heard from a lot of people that the OE non power disk master (1" bore) for our years, is worse then power drums and requires too much effort. Also all the auto store replacements for this master did not have the proper depth hole for the manual rod. You have to go to MP power brakes and pay bank for the correct one.

I'm real happy with my setup, the braking is strong with minimal effort.

I also used the 77 Malibu master with the 15/16 piston, everything else stock with a combination valve from a 72.

Ditto here...same setup on my '70 using original combo valve. Good enough to stop the Chevelle from 130mph+!

Hey Bill/Troy/Hilljack, do you have the part number on that 77 Malibu MC? I'd love to lose the booster as I don't have much vacuum anymore. How hard was it to reroute the brakelines? What about the brake pedal rod? part # for it also and where to get it?

i have a 71 velle with non power disks and it is no problem i will never put anything else on this car i also have manual steering i think im going to do something with that though.

Hey Bill/Troy/Hilljack, do you have the part number on that 77 Malibu MC? I'd love to lose the booster as I don't have much vacuum anymore. How hard was it to reroute the brakelines? What about the brake pedal rod? part # for it also and where to get it?

Part number is 1639, application is 77 Malibu with manual brakes. It comes with a rod that you can make work, but I yanked it out and used my OE manual brake rod for a complete bolt in.
You can probably make the stock lines fit, however I did things a little differently so I went to Harbor and bought a cheapy double flare tool. It takes a little practice especially with the POS tool.

I have four wheel manual discs on my '71. I used AC Delco # 18M72 (GM # 18030314), which (amoung others) is for a '68 Corvette. Bore is 1 1/8". Used '70-'76 F-body calipers with 12" discs front and 11" 1999 Ford Explorer rear discs. Pedal feel is firm, but much better than the four wheel manual drums I had. I like it a lot. But I think most women would have a hard time putting the pressure required to the pedal to bring to the car to a quick stop in a panic.

Alan,
Its a good thing you keep your women in the back seat most of the time!!!!....LOL

I have four wheel manual discs on my '71. I used AC Delco # 18M72 (GM # 18030314), which (amoung others) is for a '68 Corvette. Bore is 1 1/8". Used '70-'76 F-body calipers with 12" discs front and 11" 1999 Ford Explorer rear discs. Pedal feel is firm, but much better than the four wheel manual drums I had. I like it a lot. But I think most women would have a hard time putting the pressure required to the pedal to bring to the car to a quick stop in a panic.

Alan,
Its a good thing you keep your women in the back seat most of the time!!!!....LOL

That's right. I keep them buckled up in the back seat. It's a dominance thing ;)

Alan,
Change your rear discs out to some 2 1/8 inch pistons from an Impala and the pedal effort will be easier, though with a little more pedal travel. Less front wear, but might need to adjust your proportioning valve a tad for hard stops (assuming you have an adjustable). I'm thinking it's most way sqeezed w/ the little 'sporler calipers. The 2 1/8 are better matched to your front, and the Impala I think still has drum in hat parking brake.
Explorer discs are only 1 7/8" piston... about 3/4 sqare inch less area. Very hard stops might see little diffference though in pedal effort.... but I'm not a psychic. Just think the Exploder rear discs are a bit small for a 12", 2 15/16" piston front. Cause a good hard pedal maybe...
Even going to a 1" master w/ manual w/ what you have will increase your line pressure, and still should have enough volume for your current brakes.
Might be worth a try if Wifey wants a try at the wheel ;)

Alan,
Change your rear discs out to some 2 1/8 inch pistons from an Impala and the pedal effort will be easier, though with a little more pedal travel. Less front wear, but might need to adjust your proportioning valve a tad for hard stops (assuming you have an adjustable). I'm thinking it's most way sqeezed w/ the little 'sporler calipers. The 2 1/8 are better matched to your front, and the Impala I think still has drum in hat parking brake.
Explorer discs are only 1 7/8" piston... about 3/4 sqare inch less area. Very hard stops might see little diffference though in pedal effort.... but I'm not a psychic. Just think the Exploder rear discs are a bit small for a 12", 2 15/16" piston front. Cause a good hard pedal maybe...
Even going to a 1" master w/ manual w/ what you have will increase your line pressure, and still should have enough volume for your current brakes.
Might be worth a try if Wifey wants a try at the wheel ;)

Are you saying swap the front calipers for those from an Impala? What year? The rear setup is staying put, but I don't mind changing calipers on the front. I do have an adjustable prop. valve. I was planning on upgrading to a hydraboost, which should make to effort a lot less. Trying other calipers in the meantime might be something to try. Thanks for the tip :thumbsup:

Oh, I ain't got no wifey, so I'm the only one that has to put up with the manual brakes ;)

I meant the rears because the Impala front calipers are the same size as yours... but you could accomplish the same with proper sized smaller front caliper piston(s). At this time you may have too much front/too little rear. Go to Stoptech.com and read up on their technical whitepapers about braking balance. Also do not use semi-mets with manual disc.

Examples of front:rear caliper balance based on piston area/ numbers are rounded off.

69 JL8 65:35
96 Explorer: 66:34
95 SS Impala: 66:34
79 T/A 59:41

You: 71:29

Your 12" front compared to the 11" rear further throws the balance to the front. I don't know what pads you have though.

Better balance will improve stopping distance and reduce pedal effort if done correctly.

One thing regarding the 94-96 Impala SS. The 66:34 figure, if that represents the factory brake bias (meaning the front brakes apply 66% of the force and the rears apply 34% of the force) that's not correct. It may be what the calipers front and rear were designed for, but GM screwed up with the proportion valve (they used the front disc/rear drum prop. valve). Yeah, the car stopped in 119 or so feet from 60mph, but the rear brakes basically never wore out. The brake bias was not correct. Rear brakes one those cars easily lasted more than 100k miles. The true bias as delivered from the factory was more like 90 to 95% front/ 5-10% rear. I modified my prop. valve to get the front/rear bias closer to 75/25%. Dramatic improvement was seen with reducing weight transfer to the front under braking. Front pads wore less. Stopping distance change slightly for the better (a few feet). If I can find the before-after test again, I'll post a link.

According the stoptech.com, the bias depends on many factors. When upgrading braking, they say it is best to achieve the same bias the factory had with the original setup. I have no idea what that bias was for my Chevelle. As far as my current balance, it's hard to stay what the bias is. Are you saying my bias is 71/29? So, the front is doing 71% of the braking? On paper that may look bad, but so far in my 60 to 0 stops with maximum braking effort, I have yet to have the rear tires lock up. In fact, neither the front or the back tires lock up at all. Even on rain slick roads, I'm not getting any tire lock-up under hard braking.

I'm not saying my setup is perfect. I'd be willing to try different parts (front/rear calipers), pads, rotors, etc. Just I don't have enough knowledge of determining how to get the brakes to work better than current without my tires locking up under maximum braking effort. What I don't want to do is change out the rear brakes. I should be able to fine tune the braking system with calipers and pads, correct? As far as my current front pads, I'm using Performance Friction z-rate ceramic metallics. Rear pads are stock Ford Explorer pads.

Of course the rears wont lock. They be too tiny ;)

Nix the metallic fronts and get some organics. They have a higher CF. It will throw your balnce off even more to the front, but at least you might be able to stop. Do as others suggested and experiment with a smaller master for higher line pressure too, to get the ball stopping, so to speak.

You are correct on the SS. GM screwed that one up. They used the same combination block on those cars as the disc/drum models, but then again, they weren't running manual brakes. The fix for the balance on them is to remove the metering and proportioning valves from the valve body and run straight pressure.

The hydraulics are first and foremost to try to get the balance right, and you should start with factory specs, yes. Ideally your rotors would be the same diameter to make things easier to figure. I go by thumb rules rather than the intense math.

Here's my take:
Bias is thrown by things like center of gravity. It is the basis for which you choose your brake sizes. I make a distinction between balance and bias. It's probably not really right, but it helps to do the set-up. I think of it like a teeter totter with an offset fulcrum. The fulcrum (bias) is off to the front, so you have to find a way to get it balanced (make the front brakes bigger than the rear).

Your hydraulics are 71/29, balance being thrown further front by the different disc size. There is little chance the rears will lock with what you have, even if you jacked up the back end, had an aluminum axle, and ran my in-laws in the front seat. The rears are too weak in comparison. Doing all of that would change your bias, but not your balance (by my definition). Each brake would still do the same amount of work, but you would have adjusted the car to match the brakes (moved the fulcrum backwards).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OE hydraulioc balance with 4wheel disc was 65/35, 4wheel drum was 62/38. Estimating initial bias in this way doesn't work with disc/drum, unfortunately, but I believe it was listed as a 61/39 balance. Like I said, I dont do all the math.

The closer to 50/50 the balance is, the more likely you will need a prop valve, which is a good thing (though you dont actual;ly wany 50/50)

Running comparitively large back brakes with a prop valve is ideal for street driving, rather than setting the balance to not need one, because the prop valve allows full pressure to the rear during light-normal braking.
I would look for front calipers with a piston diameter of about 2.5-2.6" for single piston/ 2 or 4 piston calipers would need piston diameters of about 1.65-1.75".

Manual disc brakes depend heavily on pedal ratio. Verify that yours is over 6:1. GM changed the pedal ratio on many cars in the 70s to about 5.5:1. If you have the lower pedal ratio, it is nearly impossible to get 4wl manual discs to work.

Changing to smaller front calipers will definitely require a smaller master cylinder. For your best manual brake stopping, you would use a race setup with 2 single port masters and a balance bar. That way you can use even smaller masters for the extra line pressure without sacrificing pedal height, and you can manually adjust the balance in addition to having a prop valve.
If you choose to stick to a stock style master, you may have to add a little pedal travel with a smaller master to be able to lock the brakes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You could just do as others have suggested and experiment with a smaller master with your current brakes. It might do the trick for you to be satisfied. Your balance is off though. The hydraulics and the rotors both throw it to the front. Anything you would do to make the balance better with just pad materials will make it even harder to stop.

Howe makes a replacement lightweight 2.6" piston front caliper. It's better matched to your rears than what you have (2.9"), making your hydraulics a 65/35 match. Master size would be 15/16-1" bore. Dual bar masters would be 3/4-7/8".

Another alternative is you could run a dual racing master setup with what you have, with 2 different size masters, and be set. 7/8" for front brakes, 3/4" for rear. This would effectively change the hydraulic balance by sending two different line pressures... the higher pressure to the rear. Not really the ideal setup.


Or just go to power brakes, and forget about having good balance, kind of like they did with the Impala.

There are a lot of ways to get the car to stop in a satisfying manner. It is much more difficult to get it ideal.

Now I'm tired.

Bill,i have 4 wheel non- power disc brakes on my 72 nova and they don't stop worth a damn. Thats how i came to see your post me getting ready to make a post about whats the best way to fix this problem.If i was just starting out like you are i think i would go with power disc brakes.Master brakes sells a 7-8 inch booster. bill

Wow! There certainly is a lot of interesting stuff here. My contribution to Bill's quest is to say that I have not had a manual disk Chevelle yet. But,, I did buy a new Dodge van ( to haul my race bike) in '76 and got the manual disks. They were just fine and I liked them better than power because there was no hiss-squish delay that I feel with a power booster. So, my conclusion is that you will be satisfied with the conversion using the 15/16 MC and choosing some grippy linings.

I ordered the 77 master cylinder tonight, Oreillys will have it in a couple days, I can't wait to lose the power brakes, and I sure hope it still stops. Maybe a little more bias to the rear also, I can only hope.

Non power disc/drum is much easier to get a good pedal and good stopping than 4wheel disc. The drum cylinders dont need as much volume or pressure.

Anyone know the reasoning for moving the front disc reservoir to the rear on this 77 Malibu M/C? Is the piston larger in the 77 than a stock 72? Some of you guys have links to find out all this stuff, thanks. I picked mine up yesterday and was checking it out, not sure when I'll get it mounted, I hate working in a cold garage and hate to fire up the kerosene heater when I've got other things to do later.

Anyone know the reasoning for moving the front disc reservoir to the rear on this 77 Malibu M/C? Is the piston larger in the 77 than a stock 72? Some of you guys have links to find out all this stuff, thanks. I picked mine up yesterday and was checking it out, not sure when I'll get it mounted, I hate working in a cold garage and hate to fire up the kerosene heater when I've got other things to do later.

Bob,
Make sure you come back and let us know how it works after you do get the 15/16 MC installed.
Thanks bill

Anyone know the reasoning for moving the front disc reservoir to the rear on this 77 Malibu M/C? Is the piston larger in the 77 than a stock 72? Some of you guys have links to find out all this stuff, thanks. I picked mine up yesterday and was checking it out, not sure when I'll get it mounted, I hate working in a cold garage and hate to fire up the kerosene heater when I've got other things to do later.

Bob it's because the larger reservoir needed for the calipers is in the back on the 77 Malibu master, opposite the OE power disk master.
Some of the OE nonpower disk masters have larger reservoirs front and back, like the 1" piston MP brakes sells.

If you mean why did they switch it, it probably has to do with the slightly different pressures the primary and secondary circuits exhibit due to their different internal return spring rates.
Or maybe they were just bored.

Oh, and the m/c bore for the manual brake 1977 was the smallest bore they had used to date on a disc/drum system with those sized calipers.

Bob,
Make sure you come back and let us know how it works after you do get the 15/16 MC installed.
Thanks bill

Will do, but its gonna have to warm up a bit, I do not like working in a cold garage. I need at least mid 40's before its worth firing up the kerosene heater :D

Will do, but its gonna have to warm up a bit, I do not like working in a cold garage. I need at least mid 40's before its worth firing up the kerosene heater :D

I know what you mean. It is a -1 degrees here this morning and with the price of heating fuel the way it is I just don't want to go fire up the furnace in the shop.:mad:

So here I sit, when I should be down working on my planned updates to the velle, one of which is to install air conditioning. Hard to get excited about that one.:)

This m/c?At advance auto would it be part number101639 or R11639.THANKS
Im correct thinking this m/c will work for non-power four wheel disc.? THANKS

Provided it can deliver enough volume to your calipers.... depends on what calipers you are using... if not enough volume you will never get a pedal. It also might (doubtful) have a residual valve since it is originally for disc/drum.

I thought this was the m/c everybody was talking about that is a good choice for four wheel disc brakes? Im really confused on what to get for my 1972 nova which has wilwood disc two piston calp on all four corners? I have a brand new master brakes m/c 1 inch bore and it's just not getting the job done! Im at the point now i don't know if it's more psi i need or if it's more volume i need. I thought it was more psi i needed and was going to get this m/c because of the 15/16 bore?bill

I got the 77 MC mounted and brake lines hooked up, no more booster under the hood. The rod that came with the MC was too short, I had to modify the original pushrod, cut it off the booster, round the edges with a grinder and use it. Its adjustable too with the clevis that was on the original push rod. I also had to move the pushrod to the upper hole on the brake pedal. I bench bled the MC but the pedal is still spongey, so I'll bleed the brakes when I get help and let you know how they work.

Thanks BOB,Im having the same problem as you are having.Soft pedal and i have bleed the damn brakes for three day's.The m/c is not the correct size but really not sure which way to go at this point so I'll be cool on my stool untill I'm sure which direction to go. Your ride has disc/drum ,my car has disc/disc.Let me know bob.THANKS,BILL

Guys after the swap my peddle never felt as hard as the non power drum setup. I got use to it, heck my new 06 F250 has a spongy feel to it.

Driver, a smaller master has less volume, equals more travel in the pedal, but also more line pressure per foot effort.

You need to do a step by step diagnosis on your vehicle, including checking caliper alignment, and find out what size pistons those Wilwoods have to choose a master. I read your other post under performance and the symptoms are a bit vague due to the randomness of the diagnosis, though you may have a defective master ...maybe some other problems.
Start with this flowchart and tell us what you find and what size pistons your calipers have.
http://piratejack.net/troubleshooting/softpedal.pdf

Thanks,bill Here is the strange thing that's going.Me and a buddy yesterday did all the test that master brakes say's to do.Number one plug both outlets on the m/c and press the brake pedal if it holds it's a good m/c.If it goes to the floor it's bad(replace m/c) but it passed the test twice.The next step mp say's to do is leave the rear plug in the m/c and hook up the front brake line and test pedal again if it's hard(not soft) and holds your problem is not in the front.Then mp say's to go ahead and hook up the rear brake line(with the front still hooked up)and test pedal again and if brake is soft or does not hold your problem is in the rear.That's what i get a soft pedal once rear line is hooked back up.BUT here is the strange part-turn mp's test around and unhook the front brake line and plug the outlet on the m/c and leave the rear brake line hooked up it works fine.Let me say it this way.With one brake line hooked up at a time no matter which one it has a good pedal hook both brake lines up you have a soft pedal.I wish i would have held onto my old m/c but i trashed it as soon as i got this new one. THANKS,BILL

Test for the master bypassing at partial stroke. Plug both ports, loosen one and push down slightly, tighten, pedal should stay. Repeat at other plug. A master bypassing at partial stroke will otherwise pass the plug/linelock test.

Sometimes pushrod adjustment will also cause that symptom, too small of a bore, excessive lining clearence, and maybe some other things ;) When it goes soft will it pump up?

It seems to pump up ok but put some force behind the brake pedal and then it's soft. It's like a sponge.Im headed to jegs right now to pick up a wilwood m/c.I'll let you know the results.BILL

Got to be honest!(M/C WAS NOT THE PROBLEM) I hate to waste money like that but I HAD TO FIND OUT!! I think Im on to something here but what to do about it.When I 1st got the new m/c installed and all the air out of the system I noticed right away the pedal was firm with-out the sponge feeling BUT,with this wilwood m/c I got a new rod as well so I used the new one and adjusted the play out of the pedal which was adjusted correct But being adjusted correct I tried turning the front rotor by hand which I couldn't.So I kept turning the rod and checking the rotor untill I could turn the rotor by hand.Got back into the car and tried brake which felt soft and the sponge feeling came back.The rear brakes I can turn by hand with no problem.I tried playing with the rod some more but every time I got it firm where I would like for it to be I couldn't turn the rotor.I noticed on the rear pads there is a spring on the cotter pin that holds the pads on.The spring is between the pads but I also noticed that the front brakes don't have this spring.(IF THAT MEANS ANYTHING AT ALL) I took the front rotors off to see if i could get some adjustment out of the rotors(TO GET A LITTLE MORE PLAY TO ALLOW FOR ADJUSTING THE ROD) but it already has three washers on them bringing them out as far as possible.It looks as tho it has the tan brake pads(wilwood) but they look thick.If the pads were thinner i would have a little more play.At this stage I'm just throwing darts out here.I don't know maybe the fronts aren't releasing like they should??They seem to work fine when you adjust the rod.Maybe i should just get it adjusted as best as i can and let ride.Anyway Thanks,BILL

Pushrod must be adjusted to ZERO drag, plus extra play to allow for heat expansion.

I hope you meant the washers were centering the calipers to the rotors, rather than the rotors to the calipers. You should have no washers between caliper and hub.

Once the M/C pushrod is adjusted to zero drag at the calipers, pad thickness has ZERO effect. The front caliper pistons will adjust outward to make up for pad thickness. That is, if you put on thinner pads, even worn out ones, then pumped the brakes to bring the pistons out, you would have the same problem.
Perhaps the rear brakes are parking brake activated and not adjusted correctly? But you said they are dual piston in the rear too?

The pad spreader spring and pushrod adjustment are unrelated. You can have some slight drag when the pushrod is adjusted properly, but it would even be there if the master cylinder was removed. In fact, there should be no more drag with the cylinder on than with it off, or you will have problems.

I'm sorry none of this really helps figuring out the problem, but hopefully it give a better understanding to get there.

I hate brakes!HA HA I do relize you must have no drag and that you should have some play on your pedal or other wise you would have some hot brakes and rotors.HAHA! What get's me is this.This all strarted out when i went to the track and made a 132mph pass and pushed the pedal to stop and it was hard and i had to push with all i had to get stopped!The pedal was hard.Put a new m/c on it and now it's a whole different problem?I wish i would have held onto the old m/c. I'll go out and mess with it some more but Im getting close to putting the wheels back on and saying the hell with it.I might cut a hole in the floor and make a flintstone car out of it.HAHA.BILL I'm back!! After looking some I noticed the brake lines going from the m/c to the rear brakes are a 1/4 line.The front line is 3/16 and under the m/c the extra lenth of the line goes into a bunch of loops(talking about the front line only making the loops).Should the front be a 1/4 line or don't it really matter??I don't like the loops.I don't think the front brakes are releasing like they should.(In the front)

I finally figured out my spongey pedal, I had removed power brake booster and m/c, bench bled manual m/c and installed, pedal was really spongey but wouldnt go to the floor. I finally had some help to pump up the pedal and I just cracked open each line a couple times (front/rear brakes) at the m/c til the air was removed and the pedal was good and firm like it should be. Its still on ramps and jackstands (converter installed) as I have other things to look at, but so far so good. I'm not looking forward to removing the rearend cover :(

Bob, Thanks for keeping us updated. I won't get to mine for another month yet. Bill