Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.
MG MGA - 1600 front disk brake Photo needed
|Just Converting my 1500 to Lockheed Disk brakes .. :-/|
have searched The Gurus site and a few others but cannot
find a good photo that shows how things are plumbed together.. Re the rubber hose, hose suppost bracket on the caliper and the copper pipe..
any photos and help would be appreciated..
|The bracket position is welded in a different position on the 1600 from the 1500. This picture is of the LF on a 60 1600. The metal pipes are different as are the flexible lines. To convert a 1500 to match the 1600 application involves changine the 2 metal and 2 rubber lines and repositioning the bracket they meet at. |
|R J Brown|
|I just had a pair of short female-male pipes fabricated to bridge from the 1500 mounts to the calliper and have used these successfully for 20 years|
|Strangely enough, when I converted my 1500 to disc brakes (MGB callipers), I was able to utilise both the original bracket position and the original flexible pipes without any modification. Previously, I had been told I would have to move the bracket position but I found I could get full lock with plenty of spare 'flex'. |
Is the 1500 flexible pipe shorter than the 1600 pipe? If so, is it possible when I earlier rebuilt the car I could have fitted it with the 1600 pipe? It was this sort of detail I did not notice at the time. I just used the kit that my supplier (Bob West) provided.
|Steve, Im With you ..My Rubber pipe reaches the 1600 Lockheed Calipers no probs usung the original 1500 bracket .. My issue is do I come from the top with the Rubber pipe of from underneath as Im starting from scratch with the brake pipes.|
another issue I have is a Bracket that goes on the rear of the brake caliper,( Moss Part 138 N'o BTB136... http://www.moss-europe.co.uk/Shop/ViewProducts.aspx?PlateIndexID=477 )..
It appears to have a a cutout to support the brake rubber hose ?? but nothing lines up ..Is this bracket realy just a Locking Tab as i have seen a realy poor pic of another kit that has a lockibg tab ..
Im away from the garage untill monday so am unable to get any pics ..
Any chance that you can take a pic and post you conversion Steve ...
This was mine taken at the time of the conversion.
Having posted the photo I notice from other photos that I have my rigid pipe the other way round, coming in from the top. Other than originality, not sure whether this makes any difference. Perhaps someone else would like to comment.
|Hi Steve I have a 1600 and I too have the rigid pipe coming in from above meaning the flexy is a u bend.|
I received my car as a pile of junk so can not comment on how it was originally fitted but I placed mine what seemed to be the easiest way.
|Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo|
It will all look a bit cleaner when all the body shop dust has been pressure cleaned away.
But apart from the speedo, it's ready to roll
|Dominic............ Your a star...|
:-) :-) :-)
That bracket looks like a bit of engineering overkill. What is its purpose? - just to hold the pipe at the correct angle while you tighten the banjo?
It locates the flex hose (there is a cut out in the banjo stalk for it). I'm all for over-engineering in brakes.
|I've been busy for a couple of days, so a bit late in this discussion. Couple of interesting issues here. The first picture from R J is correct for 1600, notice the low bracket position and hose on top. The next picture from Steve is correct for the 1500 with high bracket position and hose on the bottom. Them we have two very good pictures from Dominic showing the strain relief bracket holding the banjo fitting in proper alignment.|
After that things go awry. The final two pictures show the metal and rubber piped jury rigged to install the 1600 disc brakes on the 1500 frame. I'm only a little surprised that it (sort of) works. Some years ago a friend had a 1600 that was assembled with 1500 drum brakes, and his jury rigged pipes were not properly mounted. We subsequently converted that one back to disc brakes.
I'm a little concerned with the 1500 to disk brake adaptation in the last two pictures. It strikes me that the hose might rub and chafe on the frame or lower control arm with full steering and suspension motion. If it doesn't, then bless the lucky souls who may have no problem with it. I'm pretty sure this will not work in conjunction with any kind of anti-roll bar installed, as the misplaced hose would rub on the sway bar end link near the A-arm connection point (which is almost certainly why the designers put the 1600 hose on top).
For anyone in the process of installing disc brakes on a 1500, I would highly recommend cut and weld to relocate the pipe bracket in the correct place for the original style for disc brakes. If I was doing that much work in the front suspension, the FIRST thing I would do is install a sway bar. Then if the disc brake hose does not fit the 1500 frame in the lower position, it's cut and weld time.
I haven't had this problem, as my 1500 still has drum brakes (and I have no reason to change it), but I do like to document such things for others who may be involved. Can anyone conjure up a picture of the original 1600 installation similar to Dominic's next to the last picture but with the hose in correct top position? Should be any original 1600 car, just turn the steering to full lock and take the picture (might help to jack it up some).
P.S. -- Please do not use copper tubing for brake lines.
|Barney s this what you want? 1962 1600 MK11 left front fully turned left and off the ground.
|R J Brown|
|I have to take issue with Barney here. He may be sceptical, but the setup I use has been in place since I restored the car in 1989, and that's how it was before I took it apart. On full lock either direction the hoses are fine and are neither stretched nor fouling anything. |
I have replaced the hoses twice, but only because I don't believe in emotional attachments to old rubber hoses, not because they were in any way damaged. So in other words, it's absolutely fine.
If the hoses were to be inverted in the tab, so that the (according to Barney) "correct" orientation were used, then the hoses become stretched even at the slightest movement of the steering that moves the rear of the wheel outboard.
To call this a "Jury rig" is also more than a little over the top. On the left side, I had the transverse pipe made a little longer when I replaced it because the tab on the cross member wore a pin-hole in the old one. So no extension pipe needed any more, and no relevant difference to the "correct"setup, other than an inverted hose. On the other side, there is a short section of pipe with the appropriate ends on it to make an extension to the standard pipe. It's perfectly safe, and even the local Safety Inspection guys (who are about the fussiest people you will ever meet on the planet) don't give it a second glance.
I don't have a sway bar, but also don't see how this would interfere with the setup I have. The sway bars fit to the front A pan arm, all the brake stuff is to the rear of the king pin, so I haven't the remotest idea why they should be incompatible.
|RJ, -- Yes, that is the picture I was after, showing original assembly of the 1600 brake pipes. Even better, it is shown in the maximum stretch position with full steering lock and full suspension drop, which is exactly what it is supposed to do. Go to the opposite extremes with full steering lock the other way and full compression of the suspension, and the hose will make a large inverted "U" upward.|
Dominic, -- You are right about the sway bar being in front and hose in back, no interference there. Sorry I seem to have had a slightly senile moment there. With your hose-down disc disc brake conversion on the 1500 frame, I'm still concerned that with full steering motion in the other direction the hose might rub a bit on the frame cross member (coil spring nest), or even on the lower A-arm with full compression of the suspension. I have not been there, not done that, so I cannot say it would or would not rub. Just a concerned thought with a question mark.
Here is a picture of a 1960 1600. Picture taken from above the left front brake line with the fender off. Engine and trans in car. wheel turned all the way left. Shows how the brake line fits opposite lock weight on wheels.
I think for safety's sake all should be returned to this configuration.
|R J Brown|
|If I "returned" to that configuration, I'd be stretching hoses beyond design limits at every corner.|
The issue is simple: Are the hoses rubbing or stretching, or not. If not, then the configuration is absolutely fine, whichever way is up. If yes, then it's going to fail in a very very short time, and will be obvious on even the most rudimentary post-installation check, even before the wheel goes back on.
|Given the fact I started this.............|
Many thanX to all for the help so far..
I was aware that the Brake mounting position on the front chassis/spring mounting area differd from the 1500 to 1600..
whilst offering up the brake components it looked like
there was no problem or need to relocate the Mounting point as the Hose did not snag... Could it be that the New Hoses are MGB and a slightly different length..( as most bits I buy for the "A" seem to come with a MGB label ..
Just a thought...
I see that yours is a 1500. Without moving the welded on tab yours can't be made to match a 1600. I am not real fond of pic #4 and using 2 lines. #3 looks better. I am sure it is OK but my OCD behaviors just don't like it.
The picture below is my Red 58 1500 with MGB front suspension and brakes as you can see I also kept the 1500 direction on the line installation.
|R J Brown|
|Just for comparison here is my coupe with stock 1500 drum brakes.
|R J Brown|
This thread was discussed between 14/04/2011 and 19/04/2011
MG MGA index
This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGA BBS is active now.