Hello and welcome to Packard Motor Car Information! If you're new here, please register for a free account.  
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
FAQ's
Main Menu
Recent Forum Topics
Who is Online
134 user(s) are online (84 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 1
Guests: 133

Packard Don, more...
Helping out...
PackardInfo is a free resource for Packard Owners that is completely supported by user donations. If you can help out, that would be great!

Donate via PayPal
Video Content
Visit PackardInfo.com YouTube Playlist

Donate via PayPal



« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 »

Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#21
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Mopar_Earl
See User information
Thanks! I added the car to the registry.


Earl

Posted on: 2023/11/24 16:45
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#22
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Ozstatman
See User information
That was quick! for including your '53 PatricianTouring Sedan in PackardInfo's Packard Vehicle Registry.

To edit your entry, first make sure you're logged into PackardInfo under your Forum Name.
- Then open the entry in the Registry you want to edit.
- Scroll to the bottom of the entry
- Click on the "Make Changes" field in the lower left of the screen.
- Make your changes.
- Then click on the "Save Changes" button. - Also found at the bottom of the screen.
- And, voilà, you've edited/updated your Registry entry.

Posted on: 2023/11/24 17:11
Mal
/o[]o\
====

Bowral, Southern Highlands of NSW, Australia
"Out of chaos comes order" - Nietzsche.

1938 Eight Touring Sedan - SOLD

1941 One-Twenty Club Coupe - SOLD

1948 Super Eight Limo, chassis RHD - SOLD

1950 Eight Touring Sedan - SOLD

What's this?
Put your Packard in the Packard Vehicle Registry!
Here's how!
Any questions - PM or email me at ozstatman@gmail.com
 Top  Print   
Like (1)
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home

JWL
See User information
An easier solution would be to install a non-boosted dual master cylinder. Pedal and linkage parts from a non-power brake Packard are available. Mounting the master cylinder will require some thought and work, but doable. I had the Easamatic power brake system removed from my 1955 Super Clipper (no torsion level and similar to your 1953 Patrician) and replaced with a conventional single cylinder master cylinder. All parts were from an earlier Packard. The brakes worked remarkably well, they were well modulated and easy pedal action. Ross Miller did the conversion. This should be a more than satisfactory change even with disc brakes on the front. Of course, you will need a proportioning valve so as to have good brake balance between the front and rear brakes.

Posted on: 2023/11/25 12:54
We move toward
And make happen
What occupies our mind... (W. Scherer)
 Top  Print   
Like (1)
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#24
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
See User information
Another option although it would involve a dual voltage setup or converting to 12v is to use an Electro-boost system sold by ABS power brake. That master is small and the reservoir, pump, and accumulator can be mounted separately. It is considerably more money than a vacuum booster but several have installed them in V8 models and so far as I have heard it seems to work well. I disagree with how some have kept the 1:1 ratio and instead turned up the boost to maximum to make up the difference of not having a higher ratio. IMO, that is an accident waiting to happen if something fails in the boost portion but apparently it has not been a concern -- yet.

I don't know if they still make the remote fill master shown in these photos but since that master is fairly slender it should be much easier to mount higher and closer to the column to get a better ratio. Even the regular fill models are about the size of a manual master and could get fairly close. If the remote fill is still around possibly it could even share the vent opening by modifying the vent tube to let air have a small channel and master can occupy a portion. Both functions would be present and if the master was partially hidden still look mostly stock.

Here is one install but I do not remember whose car it is.

Attach file:



jpg  Electroboost1.jpg (52.82 KB)
209_656241e880a85.jpg 453X604 px

jpg  Electroboost2.jpg (62.61 KB)
209_65624201b6c22.jpg 500X375 px

Posted on: 2023/11/25 13:52
Howard
 Top  Print   
Wow (1)
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home

TxGoat
See User information
Non-boosted disc brakes typically require considerable pedal effort or long pedal travel.

Posted on: 2023/11/25 15:42
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#26
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Mopar_Earl
See User information
Quote:

JWL wrote:
An easier solution would be to install a non-boosted dual master cylinder. Pedal and linkage parts from a non-power brake Packard are available. Mounting the master cylinder will require some thought and work, but doable. I had the Easamatic power brake system removed from my 1955 Super Clipper (no torsion level and similar to your 1953 Patrician) and replaced with a conventional single cylinder master cylinder. All parts were from an earlier Packard. The brakes worked remarkably well, they were well modulated and easy pedal action. Ross Miller did the conversion. This should be a more than satisfactory change even with disc brakes on the front. Of course, you will need a proportioning valve so as to have good brake balance between the front and rear brakes.


That's my plan C. But I hear that's not straight forward either. I already have the frame mounted clutch pedal. On my 52 Dodge Coronet Club Coupe, I did front disc and dual circuit manual master conversion on it. Worked out well.

Plan A was hydroboost with 4:1 pedal ratio, but the factory pump is half the flow and pressure that's needed.

Plan B is my current plan of a vac booster with 4:1 pedal ratio.


Earl

Posted on: 2023/11/25 21:34
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#27
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Mopar_Earl
See User information
Quote:

HH56 wrote:
Another option although it would involve a dual voltage setup or converting to 12v is to use an Electro-boost system sold by ABS power brake. That master is small and the reservoir, pump, and accumulator can be mounted separately. It is considerably more money than a vacuum booster but several have installed them in V8 models and so far as I have heard it seems to work well. I disagree with how some have kept the 1:1 ratio and instead turned up the boost to maximum to make up the difference of not having a higher ratio. IMO, that is an accident waiting to happen if something fails in the boost portion but apparently it has not been a concern -- yet.

I don't know if they still make the remote fill master shown in these photos but since that master is fairly slender it should be much easier to mount higher and closer to the column to get a better ratio. Even the regular fill models are about the size of a manual master and could get fairly close. If the remote fill is still around possibly it could even share the vent opening by modifying the vent tube to let air have a small channel and master can occupy a portion. Both functions would be present and if the master was partially hidden still look mostly stock.

Here is one install but I do not remember whose car it is.


That's a cool setup. Not for me though. No matter what type of system, the 1:1 pedal has to go. You're not going to get a proper system without the correct ratio. Also those 1:1 ratio pedals aren't strong at all. Pretty iffy built. I can move mine all over the place. A buddy of mine has a small salvage yard. I'm going to go look at pedal assemblies to see what I can find to adapt. I found some aftermarket universal pedal assemblies I like but would have to bend the pedal to get it to clear the clutch pedal. Often modern pedals are bent for locating, especially on manuals.


Earl

Posted on: 2023/11/25 21:43
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#28
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
See User information
Quote:
No matter what type of system, the 1:1 pedal has to go.


Totally agree and those that did use the 1:1 ratio I think should be keeping their fingers crossed.

What I was referring to is without the large vacuum booster anyone with 12v and contemplating a change could take advantage of the smaller master in the Electro-boost system to raise it up and possibly use the space between the vent and steering column. That way you could get a decent ratio possibly without losing the vent and also not have as much interference with other close by objects as there would be with a large diameter vacuum booster and long overall assembly to contend with.

As to the weak pedal arm, that is probably a valid concern. A few vent installs have used Ford Ranger pickup pedals and at least one used a 70-80s Chevy setup with the extra wide pedal.

Posted on: 2023/11/25 22:22
Howard
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#29
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Mopar_Earl
See User information
I understand the direction you were going with that cool system. My plan A hydroboost is much smaller than a vac booster and will out boost any vac booster with a nice pedal feel. Love me some hydroboost. Lol I just don't want to upgrade the OE pump or run dual pumps.

I saw a thread where a guy mounted a vac booster higher up at the main harness bulkhead passthrough grommet. He used a booster with standoff brackets to allow the harness to pass through. But he did have to enlarge the hole. But kept his crotch vent. The booster ended up about the location of modern vehicles. But that requires the pedal to go higher yet.

There is a company that makes a modern setup for the early 50's GM cars that are very similar. I send them an email asking if they ever had anyone try it in a Packard and what their pedal ratio is. It comes with a new pedal mounted on it. Also dimensions so I could see if that could be modified to fit.


Earl

Posted on: 2023/11/25 22:47
 Top  Print   
 


Re: 1953 Patrician: has anyone updated from Treadlevac to modern 2-chamber mstr cyl?
#30
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
See User information
A ready made system would be great if it can be found. So far none have been or at least the mfgs won't go on record and say they will work.

IIRC, some mid 50s Chevies that used the Treadlevacs mounted them on the firewall near the top and had a fairly high ratio -- almost equal to what is used with manuals. I think it was about a 5 or 6:1 ratio.

Some of the Cadillacs were seriously firewall space challenged and their Treadlevacs (or Moraine copies) were mounted near the radiator with a long rod connecting the pedal to the unit.

Posted on: 2023/11/25 23:12
Howard
 Top  Print   
 




« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 »




Search
Recent Photos
Photo of the Day
Recent Registry
Website Comments or Questions?? Click Here Copyright 2006-2024, PackardInfo.com All Rights Reserved