http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/FO_FDYFO/p10bolt-brake01.jpg
http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/FO_FDYFO/p10bolt-brake02.jpg

------------------
I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder.
Just let me apolagize for my spelling right now!
www.EINSTYN.com (http://www.EINSTYN.com) TC Gold#1460, VCEA (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/vcea/)#2, SCPC#44
68-72 Wagon resto & mod info, parts & sales.

Intersting so far, keep me posted.

------------------
Rick Smith
72 Chevelle and a 70 Chevelle with a crushed roof, soon to be replaced.
ACES # 4051 MCC # 448
TC # 1549 81/70 Cruisers

Are you sure that's going to work? Maybe you should send me one so I can try it on my Nova 10 bolt and let you know!!

But really, do you think there is a difference in the 8.2" vs 8.5" rearends??

Thanks,
Bill C.


------------------
Bill C.
'71 SS (now with 467BBC)
'70 Nova 350/700r4
ACES #2780
Colo Spgs, CO

i really dont know if it will fit both. it fits all 3 10-bolt rears i have, but i dont know which ones i have? 8.2 or 8.5 i pretty much am only fimilular with 12 bolt rears.

Please tell me that you will be using more than the U-joint strap u-bolts to hold the rotor on....
I'm only concerned for safety

K

all you engineers do the math out there. it checks out ok with me. a 1/4-28 bolt has a minor thread diameter cross sectional area of .0326 sq.in. there are 4 of them and even if the were cheep grade 50,000 psi steel it would take 6520 pounds to sheer them. the new pictures also reflect some new bracing added. after i rechecked some numbers, i feel better with this overkill saftey factor built in. figuring a 3500 pound car on a 20 percent grade hill, with 355 gears and 30" tall tires, the parking brake is inly holding in worst case 1300 pounds. the little caliper pads would slip before the u-bolt straps would fail. the new braces i added will help the load share so not to put all the stress on the cast rear end housing fins. http://chevelles.com/showroom/FO_FDYFO/p10bolt-brake04.jpg
http://chevelles.com/showroom/FO_FDYFO/p10bolt-brake05.jpg

Originally posted by FO_FDYFO:
all you engineers do the math out there. it checks out ok with me. a 1/4-28 bolt has a minor thread diameter cross sectional area of .0326 sq.in. there are 4 of them and even if the were cheep grade 50,000 psi steel it would take 6520 pounds to sheer them. the new pictures also reflect some new bracing added. after i rechecked some numbers, i feel better with this overkill saftey factor built in. figuring a 3500 pound car on a 20 percent grade hill, with 355 gears and 30" tall tires, the parking brake is inly holding in worst case 1300 pounds. the little caliper pads would slip before the u-bolt straps would fail. the new braces i added will help the load share so not to put all the stress on the cast rear end housing fins.
Okie dokie. I hadn't the means to do the calcs on that one, so I was wondering.
Not a lot of other places to put bolts through there anyways.
It might be an added emotional safety factor to put billet straps on and use bolts that are a known quantity for securing both the driveshaft and the rotor.

Keith

More details please. Donor for the rotor and caliper?

agreed that is a very nice parking brake, but isnt it supposed to be an emergency brake? Do you think it could handle stopping the car if the hydraulic brakes failed?

thanks for the responces guys,
Keith, what i used is the minimum strength of steel if the straps were grade 5. and the calculations still show that they are more then suficient. my hunch is that the straps are better then grade 5. but i will look at performence straps with a know strength. i agree, you would not want the rotor to brake the u-bolt and allow the u-joint to come loose. graemlins/thumbsup.gif
Rick, the rotor and caliper are not from any donor cars, i purchased them from independent manufacturers. replacement caliper pads are available. i have those too. graemlins/thumbsup.gif
Drptop, technically, this is a parking brake. it is all that is required by law. it meets all the requirements of being a seperat mechanical braking independent from any hydraulic system. it is designed to hold the car in the park possition. it might stop a car if the brakes failed, but dual reservoir mastercylinders and warning lights help to avoid brake failure. it would surely help slow the car down. i have not tested the stopping power of this parking brake yet. but it surely will do what it is designed to do which is hold the car from rolling and meet the legal requirements of a parking brake. graemlins/thumbsup.gif