'66 front & rear brake hoses; GM; best repros?

[Gary B.]

Does anyone have a guess as to why the GM service replacement brake hoses (GM #357793, 357794) are so darned expensive? The GM list price for two front hoses and two rear hoses is over $175. I know the hoses are not judged, so do people have suggestions for less expensive hoses that would have the proper end configurations to accept the original C-clip style clips for a '66?

Thanks,

Gary

[Joe L.]

Re: '66 front & rear brake hoses; GM; best repros?

Gary-----

Usually, one gets what one pays for and, very often, the GM-sourced parts are different and of better quality than aftermarket. In this particular case, though, I'm not so sure.

First of all, brake hoses need to be DOT-approved. So, there's an inherent standard there.

The GM REAR brake hose, GM #357794, is also available through the Delco parts channel. It's known as Delco #176-770. This is EXACTLY the same part you get when you order through the GM parts system; it will usually even have the GM #357794 on the package. Delco list is about 23 bucks and you should be able to buy them for less than that.

For unknown reasons, the GM FRONT brake hose, GM #357793, is NOT available through Delco. You can only buy it through GM parts system channels. Why? I have no idea.

However, there are other Delco parts system brake hoses, also available through the GM parts system, which cost a lot less. These are as follows:

front: Delco #18J2028 aka GM #19169831--about 15 bucks, GM list, less thru Delco

rear: Delco #18J91 aka GM #18031802--about 22 bucks GM list, less thru Delco.

I can tell you that the end fittings and crimps on all of the above, including the 357793 and 357794, are virtually identical to one another. There is a difference in "striping" and printed numbers. However, all are DOT.

I can also tell you that the end fittings and crimps on all of the above, including the 357793 and 357794, are not at all like the original hoses used on your car or any pre-1975 Corvette. However, if you're referring to the "horseshoe" clips that retain the brake lines to the frame or trailing arm, they will work perfectly with these hoses. If you are talking about the c-clips which I believe were used on 63-66 Corvettes and which are supplied as part of the hose assembly, NONE of the above lines will have that feature. They all use the 67+ configuration which eliminates the c-clip and uses an integral flange on the fitting. I have seen some aftermarket-type hoses which use the earlier configuration, but it's been a long while; I don't know if they are still available, or not.

By the way, the GM #357793 and 357794 were used in PRODUCTION from early 1975 through 1982.

[Mike M.]

Re: '66 front & rear brake hoses; GM; best repros?

The hoses are judged. They will see the double crimp for dot approved and you will get a deduct. You think hoses are priced high try pricing the gm transmission mount for a 63 to 67.

[Joe L.]

Re: '66 front & rear brake hoses; GM; best repros?

Mike-----

You don't have to worry about paying GM big $$$$ for that transmission mount anymore. They solved the price problem---it's now discontinued.

[Gary B.]

Brake hoses judged? Or not?

Mike,

I'm sure I read somewhere that brake hoses were not judged because of the desire to have people not use old and perhaps unsafe hoses. I must admit though, that In my '66 TIM&JG I can't find any mention of not judging hoses, nor can I find any mention of them being judged. In the 66 judging sheets, can you tell me where the flexible brake hoses are judged? I really thought I had a judging bye on the hoses.

Thanks,

Gary

[Mike M.]

Re: Brake hoses judged? Or not?

In the Chassis section under front Suspension #7, Knuckles, spindles, arms & brake assemblies. I lost 1 point for hoses double crimped replacement style. This was in Windsor at the 2004 National. Maybe they have changed and are not judging them now.

[Mike M.]

Gary thsi is taken

Gary this is taken from my judging sheets for a 65. Mike

[Gary B.]

Hoses judged

Mike,

I'm sure if they're judging hose on '65s they they're doing it on other mid-years. Oh well. Yet more parts to track down.

Gary

[John C.]

Re: Hoses judged

The problem with judging brake hoses is the JG's for the various years are not consistent. The 68-69 guide gives a description of what the hoses should look like and then specifically states that they are not to be judged do to the fact they are a safety item subject to deterioration. The 66 guide does not even make a mention that you should have brakes hoses, a description of them to judge against, and/or if they are to be judged.

IMO they shouldn't be judged and I won't make deductions for replacements.

John

[Page C.]

Re: Hoses judged

The steel end that screws into the caliper on 1965 and 1966's has a different configuration than the replacements. The replacements are being made like the 1967's and up. I would think the double crimp could be looked at as a safety issue but the configuration issue is very noticeable.
Regards,
Page Campbell

[Page C.]

Re: Hoses judged

My above post refers to the front brake hoses.
Page

[Mike M.]

Re: Hoses judged

It was only 1 point I wouldn't change to old style hoses even if it was 10 points. Mike