Packard Forum Index » Modification Discussion

Well all I can say is that I have had the treadlvac units in my Patrician, my wifes Patrician, and my CLIPPERROD rebuilt by Ed Strain and have had no problems with either. Now let me hedge on that just a bit. My patrician gets driven the most, but no where near what some of you guys put in. My wifes car probably does not have 1k miles on it since we finished some years back and my CLIPPERROD, has yet to be driven on the highway. From the standpoint of my car, I am perfectly pleased with the treadlevac, and have had none of the problems that you guys have stated. The same holds true for the T/U. People hate it and don't want it, I have had no trouble with it. Go figure.

HH56: When I looked at under the floor units like you mentioned and showed, I found that there is insufficient room for a 7in diameter booster, much less a more preferred 8in one. However, if one clearanced the floor under the seat and raised the unit up and used the extended lever rod as per one of the examples, then one might be able to get the bottom of the booster above the bottom of the frame rail.

For discussion sake, I just measured some clearances under the power seat since I happen to have one removed and available. On the driver side, the lowest crosshaft is about 3in above the floor. The distance between the two fore-aft struts is a little over 7in. It looks like there should be room there for a clearance hump on the floor. Of course, one would not be able to move the seat very much, as the two fore-aft struts are connected by a common plate.

It would probably take mocking one up on a parts car to go further. In any case, this is no simple bolt-in.

Craig

Craig, thanks. That was pretty much what I figured on the regular PB units but MikeG had mentioned the hydrovac. That could easily be fitted somewhere, like under the fender where the current vacuum reservoir is located.

With parts cars for the Packard components maybe not an option, by getting the streetrod setup, the cylinder could still probably be put in the regular under the floor standard brake spot. That way, the fill hole is already there. Until I see it proven otherwise, still think it would be possible to make the suspended pedal work. It might take a bit of rework on the mechanical advantage to get the complete travel of cylinder with a reduced pedal travel but the hydrovac should make that workable.

Even though I've never had the complete brake failure, have had a loss of vacuum so the way I see it, even with a slight reduced mech advantage, if something happened to hydrovac assist, the brakes should still be as good if not better than the current PB setup with no assist--and way better than some of you have experienced.

Anyway, just a thought for discussion & possible solution for those contemplating some kind of a change.

If you're wanting power brakes in a small package just use a HydroBoost. Small, simple, and dependable.

A good option but doesn't the HydroBoost still require the fairly high mechanical ratio to stop if engine not running--also the pressure tubing off PS pump? Another option would be the ElectoBoost but still same issue and pricy to boot.

Well, no one said it would be simple!

Very true--but still would be nice to come up with some kind of consensus on an approach that would work so anyone who has lost confidence in the BTV could change it. Ideally it would still look authentic enough the purists would have to look twice before getting upset. There are enough mechanically talented people on here that a how to & what to use should be doable.

HH56-You are confusing hydroboost with hydrovac, no lines from the P/S pump with hydrovac, just engine vacuum. Been doing a little research and found out that lots of Ford products of the era used hydrovac including the 57 T Bird because of lack of space under the hood. I think if enough leverage can be had from the existing pedal it would be an easy solution.
MikeG

Sorry- should have read through all the posts. Note to self, Engage brain befor picking up tools or fingering keyboard.

So from what I gather the only thing stopping a bolt on conversion is space requirements and pedal trevel.

I mentioned it above but, what if you had someone machine a new plate to bolt the booster. It would move the mounting hole down away from the steering column, in towards the pedal, and also angle down a few degrees to better line up the original pedal.

How many psi does the brake system need to run at?

Brandon:
Quote:

<p>
From my Panther website, this booster bolts in to the <b>original toe plate</b> with only minor mods and lines up with the <b>original pedal position</b>:
</p>
<img src="http://www.1956packardpanther.com/MPB_SRB_sideview.jpg">
<img src="http://www.1956packardpanther.com/MPBInstalled.jpg">
<p>
The problem with this particular unit is pedal leverage. It requires 3:1. It has been several years since I did this adaption, so maybe an alternate approach is to find a manufacturer who makes one like this but will work with 1:1 pedal leverage. Might be worth a few phone calls by someone in need.</p>
<p>
Craig
</p>