RyanB's Buggy

[bajaherbie]

great idea on the turning brakes, rods look plenty beefy.... i doubt if they'll flex too much if at all.

[Leatherneck]

great idea on the turning brakes, rods look plenty beefy.... i doubt if they'll flex too much if at all.

Scott is slipping, didn't mention the use of wood at all. Do pay attention to his post though, I think that when you cranking on them and you do that you will get some flex. Might consider adding a brace in the middle. Just an opinion from a guy who if it can bend will bend or break it.

[RyanB]

Thanks for the input guys. So far, I've not detected any flexing. The rods were 3/8" thick I think. I've pulled on the handles with alot of force to test it and so far so good. Keep in mind, it's unlikely the turning brakes will ever get used in this car. The car will mainly be for Forest roads, mud/wheeling. I've put the turning brakes in, in case I get a wheel stuck in a hole or something and it's free spinning. I can hit the turning brake to get power to the wheel still on the ground. So, the turning break is sorta "insurance" in case I get into that situation. The car will probably see sand occasionally, but the brakes still will not get used. Glass buggies are just too heavy to properly utilize them IMHO.

Lee, the body is just sitting on top right now. I haven't begun to tack/screw it into the wood. I'll be using your idea of making a cardboard cutout of the front curve and glue/screw 2x 3/4" pieces of plywood together and cut it out. Then glue/screw it into the other supporting 2x4's and eventually glassed into the body of course. I'll be taking pics of that progress soon I hope. The more I think about it, the better I like your idea for the rear arc as well. It's all going to be glassed over but I think that would work quite well. As always, your input is always appreciated.

Thanks again for the comments so far my friends.

[Devastator]

If you flipped the turning brake cylinders around so that they faced the transmission, you could then add another lever that would actuate your cylinders. With this arrangement, you'd be pulling those long linkage rods instead of pushing them. They would be hard pressed to bend then.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

This is getting interesting: Ryan says that this is going to be mostly a woods buggy so if that is true wouldn't it behoove him to also have a single handle front brake setup allowing him to hang on a hill (in the sand it probably wouldn’t work well) when going down gears when you lug out. I have heard woods guys talking about it; I think they called it a park brake but I was only familiar with the same term used in drag racing so it took me awhile to catch on.

I think Ryan broached some new territory which could be a whole new string in itself.

As far as pulling on the threads I think that is going to be worse than pushing against them (compression of the material vs. stretching the material). He said the rods were 3/8” but they look to be less than 3/16” which is a big deal.

Bump

Lee

[Devastator]

I've never driven a buggy in the woods. I'm a native Arizonan.
My brother and I both I used to have a "brake lock" on our sandrails. They are great....for about a year. Then the stupid things won't release the brakes without cracking open the lines or bleeders! There are now 2 of them lying in the desert, side by side, where they landed after I threw them as far as I could.
I wasn't concerned with the strength of the threads on the turning brake rods. I was more concerned with them bending. I would imagine that if they are not used very often, then the time(s) that they are, will be in a moment of desperation or slight panic. At these moments, adrenaline keeps most of us from "gently" pulling on a handle. You can pull on steel linkage rods forever and they wouldn't bend. Push on them and they can bend in a hurry as soon as the cylinder bottoms out. If they are just for show, however, just chrome them and forget them.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

I have driven in the woods but not in a buggy (that was a very humorous start to a post Dev ) and I am still chuckling over it.

(The Dr. Doolittle argument/discussion: “push me pull you” ensues) I have yet to see a test of a fastener in compression (at such low load levels), only pulling… not to say that there isn’t; I just have never seen or heard of them happen at such low load levels as I said.

I have had a lot of discussion with people, both here on STF, buggy_Talk and people I know who ride buggies and rails, on pulling vs. pulling and it always comes down to personal preference (PP) aka what they think would be comfortable to them. It is natural to pull and not so much so to push even if the seat gives you more leverage to push but then what about the single handle guys; they push and pull and seem to do OK with it. I think it really comes down to more getting use to something than anything else; once you are used to it then it becomes second nature that is until you get into something where you have to pull. You push down on the brake pedal and pull upon the e-brake and that is not a problem.

I do agree with the adrenalin part of the post as it was (I assumed) in the part of my comment a couple of posts (with pictures) ago. If the piston bottomed out it would matter if the rod bent or not, nothing is going to happen if it hasn’t happened already (I feel silly already) no matter how much force you put on it but panic doesn’t always include logic does it.

I would also agree that the threaded portion should be rolled and be of the shortest length possible to eliminate the weakest part of the rod which could lead to flexing or bending. I would also agree that everything should be in a perfect alignment as possible including the arc action of the handle(s).

The more I think about it the more logical it is and I wish I had thought about it myself. Unless someone can come up with a good reason other than PP why not to do it, I even think I may use it (if Ryan doesn’t mind or is going to charge for the use of the idea) in one form or another on my black buggy and, if it weren’t for the shift rod over the tunnel and in the way, I think I would look into it for the blue buggy too (but then there are ways around that too I betcha). The only real drawback is the possibility of someone getting in or out of the buggy putting their hands on either or both of the rods and levering themselves up and out of the seat bending the rods but then a cover could handle that problem.

Lee

[Ol'fogasaurus]

Devastator, I forgot to mention, I had similar problems with what that you threw away with my first set of dual handle turning brakes. They got progressively worse until I had to open a bleeder screw to unlock the brakes whenever I used the turning brakes; with the foot brake it wasn’t a problem.

I finally called CnC and they told me to turn the cylinder liner (I think) a quarter turn to get the holes realigned in the cylinder part. I had had other problems with that brake setup so there had been moisture in the lines hence rust. The one cylinder which was the main problem was toast but they guys at CnC were aware that this was/could be a problem.

It wouldn’t surprise me that the same problem occurs in other brands too.

Lee

[Devastator]

I'm not sure that I'm making myself understood. I'm not referring to pulling or pushing the turning brake handles. I'm referring to the long, 3/8" dia., rods. Push on it and it'll eventually bend. Pull on it and it won't.

I have driven in the woods but not in a buggy (that was a very humorous start to a post Dev ) and I am still chuckling over it.

I keep picturing the mechanical braking system on the model T Ford trucks back in the day.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

I have played with mechanical brakes a long time ago; when you get them right they work surprisingly well, when they are out they are $%#@& dangerous. A lot of clevises, long rods and other funny goodies (I can't think of the name of the part I want here so "goodies" will have to suffice).

I don't think the rods are too long and of a diameter sufficient for what he is doing, after all, I seem to remember they are shorter than some of the rods on some cars. If there is a worry then an angle bracket with a tight hole in it mounted about half way down could be installed to act as a guide to limit any possibility of flex. I seem to remember that '37 was the first year for Chevy to have juice brakes, '28 I think for Dodge Bros. and maybe Plymouth and Ford may have been a couple of years later, '39 I think. My concern would be the threaded part but again, the diameter of the shaft is suck that I think it should be OK.

Lee

[Devastator]

Just in case my suggestion didn't make any sense to anyone that might want to try it:

cutting_brakes.jpg

Th linkage rod could be moved to the bottom if you wanted to pull on the handle instead of pushing on it. Either way, I hope this clarifies things a little.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

Maybe I am miss-understanding you:



This is Ryan’s idea, putting the cylinders any farther aft puts you into the pan's ID numbers. If you put the cyliknders in front of the ebrake then the ebrake doesn’t work like it is supposed to and has to stand up more and be in the way.

(I can't repost your last picture w/o a lot of playing around)

Are you talking about mounting this behind the ebrake and running the handle forward? If so you are chancing running the assembly into the pan's ID numbers which is not good.

I'm trying to understand what your idea is.

Lee

[Devastator]

I didn't realize that the pan's ID numbers were right there. Otherwise, you understand me correctly. Might just be a bad idea too.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

I didn't understand fully at first, the picture helped.

Lee

[RyanB]

Well, I have put a seat into the pan and grabbed the handle and pushed like hell on it. I see no flexing of the rods. Keep in mind the way the handles are setup there is very little up/down movement in the rod positions. Before I put brake fluid in the system I also verified that the handles can hit the tunnel and it does not bottom out. With the brake system bled, I verified that the handles currently do no go more then halfway before the brakes are fully engaged. In fact they just make it to 1/4 of the distance. For the most part, when sitting and using the brake, your initially pulling but the downward motion of the handle to transition to pushing down.

On the usage, I originally wanted a single handle setup. It was pointed out however that one of the situations I may find myself in (possibly frequently, backing down a hill) is the need to use gas/clutch and still have the ability to brake. With the double-handle setup I can grab both and act as a 'normal' dual braking instead of just a single side.

Love the input guys. So far, my initial testing seems ok. Practical use will prove it out. and I plan on getting some of that in just a few months.

As far as the push/pull thing. I can agree that pulling would never bend the rods. Actual usage might prove that my pushing method will in fact bend them. I'll try to take a closer pic of the setup too if you like. As far as the amount of threads. They are about halfway. I did this intentionally on both sides to allow room for adjustment. if I bottomed them out I would have adjustment in only one direction available. I think I have plenty of threads into each end to not cause a problem. Again, actual usage will tell.