Hi all Jag guys,
A friend told me of an outfit in Southern California (couldn’t
remember the name)that will convert E-Type rear brakes to outboard
Corvette brakes for hotrods. Anyone know anything about this
outfit?
Garth–
garthnorton
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from gnorton sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Ummmm… Why??–
Ray Livingston - '64 OTS Santa Cruz, CA
Santa Cruz, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Ray Livingston sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Umm, I’ll throw out a (big) potential ‘why’…because the the
inboard originals brakes are a logistical pain in the butt for
anything beyond a pad change!
I’d love to be able to pull my calipers off, or change out my
rotors without having to drop out a major portion of the car’s
mechanicals.
Besides, didn’t Jag eventually go to outboard discs? At least the
TRW XJSs did for racing. Just because something is not original,
that doesn’t make it EVIL.–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Ben,
Well, maybe I’m wierd, I’ve had my E on the road for 8 years
now, put on 24K miles, and haven’t yet had to so much as change the
pads. So going to great expense and bother to make a pretty
drastic modification to make a once-every-10-years job easier just
seems to me like a very poor trade-off. Besides, dropping the IRS
is not that big a deal. It takes 1-2 hours to get it out, 2-3 to
put it back. To do this mod, you’ll have to not only remove it,
but largely, if not completely, disasemble it, which is a much
bigger undertaking. In the end, you’ll spend much more time, and
much more money making this ‘‘labor-saving’’ mod than you’d spend
repairing/maintaining the standard setup for a lifetime.–
Ray Livingston - '64 OTS Santa Cruz, CA
Santa Cruz, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Ray Livingston sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
I have to agree with Ray On this. I’ve done 2 complete IRS
rebuilds, and pulled the IRS off a derelict car in my garage
with a handful of tools and a floor jack and NO assistance.
A properly restored and maintained IRS will make easy work
of a rear pad change. I’ve driven 50K HARD miles in 3.5
years and my rear pads show no sign of wear. Actually my
front pads are barely worn (the front discs are geting a bit
thin though).
For the mileage most people drive an E-type these days, the
rear pad change will be a never-in-a-lifetime occurance.
To change to outboard discs would ruin one of the
fundamental advanced engineering aspects of an E-type, which
is the substantial reduction of unsprung weight. Weigh an
alloy hub and compare it to a disc/caliper/handbrake
assembly. You could juggle 3 alloy hubs if you wanted to.
The whole exercise is gross false economy, much like
replacing an XK engine with dumb detroit iron. Don’t get me
started…
Cheers,
Eric-the-Bastard
66fhc 1E32177–
The original message included these comments:
Ben,
Well, maybe I’m wierd, I’ve had my E on the road for 8 years
now, put on 24K miles, and haven’t yet had to so much as change the
pads. So going to great expense and bother to make a pretty
drastic modification to make a once-every-10-years job easier just
seems to me like a very poor trade-off. Besides, dropping the IRS
is not that big a deal. It takes 1-2 hours to get it out, 2-3 to
–
Eric Scott Williams 66fhc (the Thunderbolt GreaseSlapper!)
Sylmar, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Eric Scott Williams sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
I know the pad changes are easy, it’s anything more than that where
it becomes more difficult than it should be.
I just disagree that inboard brakes are so wonderful. I can tell
you as a design engineer, that if I proposed a safety-critical
design with such logistical issues, I’d be smacked across the back
of the head and get told to ‘‘hit the try-harder button’’. For
racing purposes…‘ok’, but for a street car, it’s purely 60’s
bragging rights.
A system that is so maintenance-critical should not be so hard to
get to. How many modern ‘‘super cars’’ run inboard brakes?..I
can’t think of one. With todays calipers, the difference in
unsprung weight would be negligible to anything but the most razor-
edge racer.
Also, we are going on the assumption here that there is massive
cost and effort involved in this swap…that may not be the case at
all. Look at the kits for bolting on a set of Wilwood calipers to
the front which are cheaper than restoring your original calipers.
If someone had a set of completely worn out rear brakes, this swap
MAY not be a great cost adder at all. If they planned on using the
car regularly, even a healthy cost adder could amortize itself over
time for someone who would normally take their car to a specialist
shop because they didn’t have the ability/facilities to do a major
brake job themselves…with this swap they probably could.
Add to this the fact that 40 year old NOS parts have all but dried
up, and we are becoming more and more reliant on parts that are
being made to lower and lower quality standards. For this reason,
the long term maintainability may even be improved with this swap.–
The original message included these comments:
of a rear pad change. I’ve driven 50K HARD miles in 3.5
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
If you want to modify your car, have at it! You sure sound to me like you’re rationalizng though. Its a 60’s car, not necessarily modern.
Best,
Mike Moore
— beneyes@yahoo.com wrote:From: “Dagenham” beneyes@yahoo.com
To: e-type@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:08:18 +0200
In reply to a message from Eric Scott Williams sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
I know the pad changes are easy, it’s anything more than that where
it becomes more difficult than it should be.
I just disagree that inboard brakes are so wonderful. I can tell
you as a design engineer, that if I proposed a safety-critical
design with such logistical issues, I’d be smacked across the back
of the head and get told to ‘‘hit the try-harder button’’. For
racing purposes…‘ok’, but for a street car, it’s purely 60’s
bragging rights.
A system that is so maintenance-critical should not be so hard to
get to. How many modern ‘‘super cars’’ run inboard brakes?..I
can’t think of one. With todays calipers, the difference in
unsprung weight would be negligible to anything but the most razor-
edge racer.
Also, we are going on the assumption here that there is massive
cost and effort involved in this swap…that may not be the case at
all. Look at the kits for bolting on a set of Wilwood calipers to
the front which are cheaper than restoring your original calipers.
If someone had a set of completely worn out rear brakes, this swap
MAY not be a great cost adder at all. If they planned on using the
car regularly, even a healthy cost adder could amortize itself over
time for someone who would normally take their car to a specialist
shop because they didn’t have the ability/facilities to do a major
brake job themselves…with this swap they probably could.
Add to this the fact that 40 year old NOS parts have all but dried
up, and we are becoming more and more reliant on parts that are
being made to lower and lower quality standards. For this reason,
the long term maintainability may even be improved with this swap.
–
The original message included these comments:
of a rear pad change. I’ve driven 50K HARD miles in 3.5
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Dagenham,
I have to disagree to some extent. IMHO on modern cars its all about
mfg cost, they want to build a car for $0, they start adding whatever
cost necessary to make a viable product and no more. Recall some of
the horror stories of cars having to have the engine half removed to
change spark plugs. Not saying that mfgs don’t care at all about
maintainability but they WILL make compromises, major ones, to save on
production costs. Of course many of these compromises are based on
increased reliability and estimated time interval between failure. It
could be worse for us if that failure rate is normally outside
warranty periods. Heck my AC condenser is dead on my VW and in order
to replace it you have to pull everything except the motor from the
firewall forward. Chuck G. had to replace a broken fog lamp on his
and it requires the same procedure. I believe a few months ago I
recall Mike F. saying he surrendered his MB to the dealer to replace
the starter because it was buried in some ungodly place. Had a friend
who’s water pump failed last year on his BMW, pulley got loose and
tore up some stuff, $7k to repair. Every component on a car is a
compromise between cost, failure rate, cost of assembly and liability.
Repair/replacement is definitely in the equation but not that high on
the list. The above aren’t as critical as brakes but fact is
compromises will be made… at our expense.
pauls 67ots
…A system that is so maintenance-critical should not be so hard to
get to…
Dagenham
<<<<<<<<<<
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.phpFrom: “Dagenham” beneyes@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion
Hi Paul,
Over the years the Michigan Jag club has had as members many design
engineers from the not now so big “Big Three” and they all spoke of
the problems of fitting so much “stuff” in a confined space. A few
years ago I read a book covering the design of the jelly bean Taurus
from start to finish and finding space for various systems etc was a
major problem. Actually the problem is not new, just getting worse
with each new model. The following story is true and koolkatz knows
the fellow involved. A good friend, who happened to be a retired GM
engineer, had a series of XJS’s, which he dearly loved but he was
always fixing something or another. One of the cars had several small
oil leaks which Ron spent considerable time fixing and he was very
happy when he got the last one healed. About a week later he backed
out of the driveway and saw another small oil dripping on the drive
way and he discovered the problem was the classical five cent gasket
that would take three hours to replace! Sooo- Ron being the even
tempered person that he is went into the house ,found the title and
traded the Jag in on a new Jeep!! I just included this story as it
gave me a good laugh and maybe it’ll do the same for you!
Bob
889076
Plymouth, Mi.On Jun 14, 2007, at 8:49 AM, paul spurlock wrote:
Dagenham,
I have to disagree to some extent. IMHO on modern cars its all about
mfg cost, they want to build a car for $0, they start adding whatever
cost necessary to make a viable product and no more. Recall some of
the horror stories of cars having to have the engine half removed to
change spark plugs. Not saying that mfgs don’t care at all about
maintainability but they WILL make compromises, major ones, to save on
production costs. Of course many of these compromises are based on
increased reliability and estimated time interval between failure. It
could be worse for us if that failure rate is normally outside
warranty periods. Heck my AC condenser is dead on my VW and in order
to replace it you have to pull everything except the motor from the
firewall forward. Chuck G. had to replace a broken fog lamp on his
and it requires the same procedure. I believe a few months ago I
recall Mike F. saying he surrendered his MB to the dealer to replace
the starter because it was buried in some ungodly place. Had a friend
who’s water pump failed last year on his BMW, pulley got loose and
tore up some stuff, $7k to repair. Every component on a car is a
compromise between cost, failure rate, cost of assembly and liability.
Repair/replacement is definitely in the equation but not that high on
the list. The above aren’t as critical as brakes but fact is
compromises will be made… at our expense.
pauls 67otsFrom: “Dagenham” beneyes@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion…A system that is so maintenance-critical should not be so
hard to
get to…
Dagenham
<<<<<<<<<<Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
This is not my thread, Mike, I’m not proposing this mod. I’m just
playing devil’s advocate because this guy came on and asked what
COULD be a viable question, and the response he got was ‘‘Ummm,
why?’’.
My feeling is, it’s his car, and he’s not asking you, or Ray, or
Paul to do the same mods to your cars…so why not answer him in a
more productive manner? I feel that 99% of the time, the ‘‘Ummm,
why?’’ answers are a mask for ‘‘That’s not what is shown in the
factory manual’’.
But, having said all that, I will be modifying my car…freely and
willingly. This is a car that was a world-class performer 40 years
ago, and will now be blown away by many Japanese 4-door sedans.
With a bit of nipping-and-tucking, they can easily be brought into
this century.–
The original message included these comments:
If you want to modify your car, have at it! You sure sound to me like you’re rationalizng though. Its a 60’s car, not necessarily modern.
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Difficult maintenance? On a Series 1 anyhow, taking the Dunlop
rear brake cylinders off to do anything imaginable with the
calipers is easy, expecially if you have access to a lift and the
right tools. Handbrake pads change out the same way, other than
seeming impossible until you try it. And as Eric says, the whole
IRS comes out with a few bolts. What’s difficult? Changing rotors
is more difficult than with outboard designs, but my car still has
the original rotors after 43 years and that’s with plenty of hard
driving. They’re still not worn.
So where’s the problem?
The real problem is with overheating on the race track, so perhaps
this design is better for the street than for racing? Improved
ventilation has always been used on racers and hard-driven street
cars. And low unsprung weight is a very important factor in
handling, of course the heavy wire wheels counteract that quite a
bit.
Further, the drive shafts are a key part of the rear suspension,
and any modification has the potential of ruining the geometry back
there. So one hopes the makers of this kit are as good engineers
as the Jaguar factory guys.
A car with this modification is a lump, sure as if a Ford V8 had
been dropped in in the name of ‘‘improvement’’.
There is absolutely no need to upgrade the brakes of an E Type
front or rear, just keep them maintained to a minimal level and use
the best pads.
Jerry–
Jerry Mouton '64 FHC
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
I say it is his car and he should do as he wishes.
However, my experience with both Triumphs and E Types (50 years) is that people who put zoomy boy-racer after-market mods on their cars are very vocal about it. For a new kid on the block, it is easy to get the idea that these mods are what is needed to drive the car reliably.
I have done that myself. I added a whole bunch of engine and suspension mods to my 59 TR3A which did nothing except make the steering harder, the ride rougher, the engine run hotter, and it pinged (pung?)and was less enjoyable to drive.
I restored my 63 E-Type pretty much dead stock, and it is a joy to drive. I then restored my son’s 64 E Type, an otherwise identical car, except I installed a lot of boy racer stuff at his request (wider rims and tires, upgraded shocks, upgrade springs, Cat’s Claw head etc.)
That car is a pig to drive by comparison and is not enjoyable. Although I am in the minority, I want to speak up always for staying stock unless there’s a compelling reason not to. Otherwise, newly joining members may get the idea that we HAVE to modify our cars to make them 21st century compatible, and that is not the case at all. I thoroughly enjoy my 63 as is.
Best regards, Mike Moore
59 TR3A
63 OTS
64 OTS
Beneyes@yahoo.com wrote:From: “Dagenham” beneyes@yahoo.com
To: e-type@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:32:05 +0200
In reply to a message from sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
This is not my thread, Mike, I’m not proposing this mod. I’m just
playing devil’s advocate because this guy came on and asked what
COULD be a viable question, and the response he got was ‘‘Ummm,
why?’’.
My feeling is, it’s his car, and he’s not asking you, or Ray, or
Paul to do the same mods to your cars…so why not answer him in a
more productive manner? I feel that 99% of the time, the ‘‘Ummm,
why?’’ answers are a mask for ‘‘That’s not what is shown in the
factory manual’’.
The original message included these comments:
If you want to modify your car, have at it! You sure sound to me like you’re rationalizng though. Its a 60’s car, not necessarily modern.
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from mouton sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Call it whatever denigrating term you like, but you will never win
the ‘‘don’t modify’’ argument with me.
For the last 10 years, one of my regular cars has been a '64 Ford
Cortina powered by some ‘‘dumb Detroit iron’’ (302). This is a car
that in standard form would be trampled to death on a modern
freeway, and would only be suitable for weekend jollies. After
swapping the engine, gearbox, and rear axle (suspension, brakes,
interior are all standard configuration) I now have a car that will
out perform all but the most modern Porsche, Corvette, etc. Best
of all, it still looks just like a Cortina, still drives just like
one, but is infinitely more usable.
I now have a car that has covered over 100,000 miles of everyday
driving. It’s a car that I can drive to work, take on a LONG road-
trip, take to a track-day, or take for a blast in my local
mountains. It’s a car that I can now drive (and enjoy) without
having to consider the conditions and elements. Lastly, I’ve got a
lot of personal enjoyment out of modifying MY car…is that so bad??
While I’m not proposing such drastic mods for anyone’s E-type, I
think the ‘‘It’ll become a lump’’ attitudes are a bit sad.–
The original message included these comments:
A car with this modification is a lump, sure as if a Ford V8 had
been dropped in in the name of ‘‘improvement’’.
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Ben,
Sorry, this is the other 1%. I wanted to know what the goal of
this mod was. I’d be willing to bet it was to improve the stock
Jag brakes, because everyone just knows they’re crap, and of
course putting in some kind of modern replacement will make the car
stop faster. I’ve seen/heard an awful lot of people on here over
the years ready to drop piles of greenbacks because they fell for
some sellers hype about ‘‘upgrades’’ that are nothing of the sort.
Wilwoods are a perfect example. People drop lots of money on the
kits, thinking ‘‘Of course my car will stop faster’’. Guess what -
it won’t! (And, yes, I speak from experience - I have Wilwoods on
my car, not from a ‘‘kit’’, but designed and fabricated myself)
Everyone just knows the inboard rear brakes are a bad design and
will overheat just as surely as they know Jaguars always overheat,
always leak oil, and always break down every 10 miles. Guess what -
The stock inboard brakes are just fine, unless you drive like an
idiot, in which case outboard brakes won’t do you a whole lot
better. I personally couldn’t care less if the guy wants to do
this just for the sake of eye-candy, or cool factor. I’m not going
to complain about what someone else does to their car as long as
they’re making an informed decision about what they’re doing. My
car is a non-stock color, non-stock interior, non-stock alternator,
fan, radiator, etc. But if he thinks he’s doing it for ‘‘improved
performance’’, I’d like to give him the opportunity to get educated,
and perhaps put that money to better use on something that with
some real-world benefit. If he still wants to do it, it’s his car,
it shouldn’t matter a bit what anyone else thinks.
If you think this could possibly be a simple or inexpensive mod, ,
you need to look at the whole assembly. There is no simple,
inexpensive outboard brake mod to be had there. It would require,
at a minimum, new hubs, probably new half-shafts, and even new hub
carriers. And would also likely require increasing the rear
track. With the stock parts, there’s no place to put the rotors,
no way to mount them, and nothing to which to mount the calipers.
And, you’d be stressing the entire IRS assembly in ways that were
never anticipated by the designers, since you’d now be transmitting
the full braking load through the wishbones and fulcrum shafts.
That can’t be good for service life, and could be a safety concern
if not done very carefully, and with adequate structural analysis
(which most after-market mods do not get).–
The original message included these comments:
My feeling is, it’s his car, and he’s not asking you, or Ray, or
Paul to do the same mods to your cars…so why not answer him in a
more productive manner? I feel that 99% of the time, the ‘‘Ummm,
why?’’ answers are a mask for ‘‘That’s not what is shown in the
factory manual’’.Dagenham
–
Ray Livingston - '64 OTS Santa Cruz, CA
Santa Cruz, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
One of my all time best statements about speed and worrying about some new
car being faster that my E or my Healey or whatever—is —I can put a 400
horsepower engine in a go-cart and blow most cars off the road.
So----------??? Do what you want to get more and more speed out of the
E. There will always be some car somewhere that will “blow you away”.
That is not why I drive my E. The pure pleasure of driving it as it was
designed is just that–pure pleasure.
I do take exception to the “lump” comment. I think it is sad TO lump it.
Very sad.
[Original Message]
From: Dagenham beneyes@yahoo.com
To: e-type@jag-lovers.org
Date: 6/14/2007 2:32:47 PM
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversionIn reply to a message from mouton sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Call it whatever denigrating term you like, but you will never win
the ‘‘don’t modify’’ argument with me.For the last 10 years, one of my regular cars has been a '64 Ford
Cortina powered by some ‘‘dumb Detroit iron’’ (302). This is a car
that in standard form would be trampled to death on a modern
freeway, and would only be suitable for weekend jollies. After
swapping the engine, gearbox, and rear axle (suspension, brakes,
interior are all standard configuration) I now have a car that will
out perform all but the most modern Porsche, Corvette, etc. Best
of all, it still looks just like a Cortina, still drives just like
one, but is infinitely more usable.I now have a car that has covered over 100,000 miles of everyday
driving. It’s a car that I can drive to work, take on a LONG road-
trip, take to a track-day, or take for a blast in my local
mountains. It’s a car that I can now drive (and enjoy) without
having to consider the conditions and elements. Lastly, I’ve got a
lot of personal enjoyment out of modifying MY car…is that so bad??While I’m not proposing such drastic mods for anyone’s E-type, I
think the ‘‘It’ll become a lump’’ attitudes are a bit sad.The original message included these comments:
A car with this modification is a lump, sure as if a Ford V8 had
been dropped in in the name of ‘‘improvement’’.–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
That’s just fine, you’ll get no quarrels from me on what you do to your car. New list members also need to know there is a world who think stock is great also, and it isn’t necessary to modify an otherwise fine automobile.
Best, Mike Moore
ps-Part of my adverse reaction towards this is because I have a friend who is not especially vigilant and is forever deciding to do stupid things to his car which make it non-shop manual responsive. It is difficult yo help him when something goes wrong.
— beneyes@yahoo.com wrote:From: “Dagenham” beneyes@yahoo.com
To: e-type@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:17:17 +0200
In reply to a message from mouton sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Call it whatever denigrating term you like, but you will never win
the ‘‘don’t modify’’ argument with me.
For the last 10 years, one of my regular cars has been a '64 Ford
Cortina powered by some ‘‘dumb Detroit iron’’ (302). This is a car
that in standard form would be trampled to death on a modern
freeway, and would only be suitable for weekend jollies. After
swapping the engine, gearbox, and rear axle (suspension, brakes,
interior are all standard configuration) I now have a car that will
out perform all but the most modern Porsche, Corvette, etc. Best
of all, it still looks just like a Cortina, still drives just like
one, but is infinitely more usable.
I now have a car that has covered over 100,000 miles of everyday
driving. It’s a car that I can drive to work, take on a LONG road-
trip, take to a track-day, or take for a blast in my local
mountains. It’s a car that I can now drive (and enjoy) without
having to consider the conditions and elements. Lastly, I’ve got a
lot of personal enjoyment out of modifying MY car…is that so bad??
The original message included these comments:
A car with this modification is a lump, sure as if a Ford V8 had
been dropped in in the name of ‘‘improvement’’.
–
Dagenham
San Diego, CA, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Um would it be OK if I
painted my XKE poiple?
I mean, can’t have a lumped poiple Jag, can we?..;))
Paul ‘who fully agrees with both sides of this argument’ Wigton–
The original message included these comments:
Call it whatever denigrating term you like, but you will never win
the ‘‘don’t modify’’ argument with me.
While I’m not proposing such drastic mods for anyone’s E-type, I
think the ‘‘It’ll become a lump’’ attitudes are a bit sad.
–
Paul Wigton, '60 DKW 1000SP, '57 Chrysler Imperial, Tweety!
Keenesburg, CO, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
I run engineering groups. If an engineer in one of my groups
wanted to change a tried and proven ‘‘safety-critical design’’
without a good reason, and ADEQUATE TESTING to prove out the
change, I would probably smack him across the back of the head.
As Ray pointed out above, members that were not designed for
the braking loads would be stressed differently. Without
careful design, the braking balance between front and rear
will be changed, causing one or the other to lock up too
soon. For safety reasons, I would not mess with the design
of either the front or rear brakes on any of my cars. I
know people that spent thousands of dollars on their old
Tbirds replacing the drum brakes with modern disk brakes.
They often stop worse with the ‘‘upgrade’’, because there was
no real engineering in the change.
Knock yourself out with any change you want to make on your
car. Be aware that it will be a PITA to sort out and make
work close to right. I have two degrees in mechanical
engineering, access to the best FEA programs for the stress
analysis, and the ability to calculate the brake loading to
ensure proper balance. To do this right and not screw up
the ‘‘safety-critical design’’ requires a LOT more work than
simply taking the brakes off a junk vette and finding a way
to cobble them onto a Jag IRS.
With the stock brake system, when you have problems you can
get help on this forum instead of the lump forum.
Dave Christensen
MSME
65 Etype OTS
69 Etype OTS
57 Tbird–
The original message included these comments:
you as a design engineer, that if I proposed a safety-critical
design with such logistical issues, I’d be smacked across the back
of the head and get told to ‘‘hit the try-harder button’’. For
–
davchr
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
I agree Dave.
Mike Moore
USN AWOL
59 TR3A
63 OTS
64 OTS
62 C300H Chrysler
— davchr@yahoo.com wrote:From: “davchr” davchr@yahoo.com
To: e-type@jag-lovers.org
Subject: Re: [E-Type] Brake conversion
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:50:10 +0200
In reply to a message from Dagenham sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
I run engineering groups. If an engineer in one of my groups
wanted to change a tried and proven ‘‘safety-critical design’’
without a good reason, and ADEQUATE TESTING to prove out the
change, I would probably smack him across the back of the head.
As Ray pointed out above, members that were not designed for
the braking loads would be stressed differently. Without
careful design, the braking balance between front and rear
will be changed, causing one or the other to lock up too
soon. For safety reasons, I would not mess with the design
of either the front or rear brakes on any of my cars. I
know people that spent thousands of dollars on their old
Tbirds replacing the drum brakes with modern disk brakes.
They often stop worse with the ‘‘upgrade’’, because there was
no real engineering in the change.
Knock yourself out with any change you want to make on your
car. Be aware that it will be a PITA to sort out and make
work close to right. I have two degrees in mechanical
engineering, access to the best FEA programs for the stress
analysis, and the ability to calculate the brake loading to
ensure proper balance. To do this right and not screw up
the ‘‘safety-critical design’’ requires a LOT more work than
simply taking the brakes off a junk vette and finding a way
to cobble them onto a Jag IRS.
With the stock brake system, when you have problems you can
get help on this forum instead of the lump forum.
Dave Christensen
MSME
65 Etype OTS
69 Etype OTS
57 Tbird
–
The original message included these comments:
you as a design engineer, that if I proposed a safety-critical
design with such logistical issues, I’d be smacked across the back
of the head and get told to ‘‘hit the try-harder button’’. For
–
davchr
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php
In reply to a message from gnorton sent Thu 14 Jun 2007:
Dear friends,
Hey I just asked if anyone knew about an outfit that provided
outboard brakes. I’m not suggesting I’m interested in doing
anything about my rear brakes.
The only probem I see with the inboard brakes is that if or when
the differential seal starts to leak the brakes become contaminated
with gear oil and there goes the braking. My friend who told me
about the system is a great one to modify cars including putting a
steam engine in a Corvette or Jag. For me I like to keep a car
stock and any modifications should be easily reversed, such as
Wilwood brakes on the front. Now I think that is a good idea on
early E-Types.
Best regards to all,
Garth–
garthnorton
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
Search the archives & forums - http://search.jag-lovers.org/
Subscription changes - http://www.jag-lovers.com/cgi-bin/majordomo
Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php