Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

G'day all, The part article on the Russian ZES, above the BTV announcement, also make for interesting reading. best regards Peter Toet

Peter,

Here's a link to John's earlier post showing the article in full.

packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1062&start=514

Gerry: What is the purpose of the long standoffs?

Craig

Re: ZES article.

Yeah, kinda written like one of those sophomric Tom Mcahil editorials. What none of u younger people realize is that hte article was written during a time when everyone was building fallout shelters in their backyard, and looking for commies under the bed.

I don't know if the "ZES" was any good or not. I've never had a chance to smoke one over. But i'm not sure i'd put much faith or confidence in an article that sounds like Tom Mcahil speak.

Oh, by the way, for any of u young (or old) right wing moron majority types it was NOT Reagan that tore down the Wall. He had very little to do with it. It was actualy Pink Floyd who got the ball rolling on it ca. 1978.

"TEAR DOWN THE WALL.. TEAR DOWN THE WALL.. TEAR DOWN THE WALL ..........."

Craig,

The long standoffs allow me to use the original pedal and the pedal location. See the attached drawing. I wanted to keep the push rod angle as straight as possible. If the booster was closer the the angle would change.

Jerry

Attach file:

---

  (10.32 KB)

Quote:
<p>Thanks for the clarification. Was there some specification with the booster that you used about rod angle? Or did you just want to minimize variance around "straight in"?</p>
<p>The reason for asking is that both my 55 Pat and my 63 Tempest that I swapped MCs on (no booster on the latter), there seemed to be a fair amount of allowable variance in the rod angle into the ball-socket receiver before any interference would occur. Of course, straight in maximizes
the force and minimizes side thrust wear, but for a few 10s of degrees off angle around dead centerline, there would not be much loss. Just wondering.</p>


<p>Craig</p>

Craig,

I talked to the hotrod and customize car community and the informed me that straight in to the booster is the best option. A angle that is two to three degree off the centerline would be acceptable. I laid out the space in the Patrician after removing the air duct and it allowed me to back off the booster to achieve the proper angle for the pushrod. Surfing the brake websites I found that many boosters had standoffs were built with the booster. None would fit my application. I hope that this explains how I arrived at my configuration. If you have any other questions I would be Happy to answer them. You and Eric are my heroes.

Jerry

Craig,
After reading through this thread, and having my BTV fail on me once already, I've decided to go ahead and install the 7" unit from MPB in my '56 400. It seems like a straight-forward installation but I do have a question about your brake pedal modification shown on your Panther web page. As mine is a '56, can I use the stock padal without any modifications? It looks like it would be an easy fit. What am I missing?

Quote:
<p>Jed, what you are missing is that the stock pedal in STOCK location only has 1:1 leverage, i.e., straight in. You MUST mount the whole pedal as shown in order to achieve 3:1 ratio. Therefore You MUST cut off the pedal as shown in order to provide clearance for your right foot to the accelerator pedal. </p>
<p>Some posters on this forum have been critical of this altered brake pedal position, but these same critics have NEVER driven my Pat. I use left foot braking and the changeover was immediate and easy. Both Kevin, (KevinAZ) and Eric (Turbopacman) has driven my Pat, so they may want to comment. Also others (friends and valets in Las Vegas) have driven it various distances without any complaints or stated issues. I presume that one or more of them are right-foot brakers, if that is the way you normally drive.</p>
<p>Craig</p>

...