63-82 Brake Hoses - NCRS Discussion Boards

63-82 Brake Hoses

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Joe L.
    Beyond Control Poster
    • February 1, 1988
    • 43202

    63-82 Brake Hoses

    Several weeks ago Wayne Midkiff asked a question regarding brake hoses. His question was in regards to when Corvettes stopped using the c-clip retainer on the fitting on the frame end of the hoses. I responded that the only brake hoses that I was aware of that used c-clips were aftermarket hoses and if Corvettes ever used them as original equipment, that ended after the 1966 model year. Well, that information was correct but, as a result of some further research, digging into my NOS parts collection and the acquisition of some other NOS parts, I can now add something to the story.

    From 1963 until 1982 Corvettes used 4 different GM part number front brake hoses and 4 different part numbered rear brake hoses. From 1963 through 1966, Corvettes used GM #3770240-front and GM #3826352-rear. From 1967 through 1974 the GM part numbers were #3898231-front and #3878958-rear. For 1975, from start of production until about 3/75, Corvettes used GM# 351549-front and GM# 351550-rear. From 3/75 until the end of C3 production in 1982, the part numbers were GM# 357793-front and #357794-rear.

    I now have several NOS examples of each of these hoses in my collection. I will attempt to briefly describe the differences in configuration. All of the front hoses are 14" overall length and rear hoses are 8-3/4" overall length. Although there were the 4 different sets of hoses used for the specific model years described above, all are functionally interchangeable and the final iteration, #357793/357794, service all 63-82 applications and continue to be available in service. For the sake of brevity, I am going to describe only the front hoses, but the rears are similar in configuration for the particular "set".

    The 63-66 front brake hose, GM #3770240, has the end fittings attached with long, gradual crimps. The frame end fittings HAVE A C-CLIP TYPE RETAINER, as Wayne Midkiff described. The brake cylinder/caliper end fitting has an unusual turned-down, machined area between the hex surface and the threaded end with a blue inspection mark seen on the crimp area of this end. The fittings are cad or zinc plated with a very light, dull dichromate finish. The black hoses have a very light yellow or off-white stripe running the full length with no alpha numeric markings of any kind.

    The 67-74 front brake hose, GM #3898231, has similar, but slightly shorter, crimped areas on both end fittings. The frame end fitting does not have a c-clip retainer but, instead, uses an integral retaining flange. The caliper end fitting has no turned down area and, instead, has an 1-1/8" long hex. What appears to be a manufacturers' logo is repeated for the full length of one surface of the hex. The fittings are cad or zinc plated with a dichromate finish which is somewhat brighter than the earlier hose fittings. The black hoses have broken red lines running the entire length and "SAE 40R1" and "AV-1/8-8396" marked intermittently.

    The early 1975 hose, GM #351549, is quite rare as it was used for such a short period. The end fittings have crimps very similar to the 3898231 hose, but slightly "deeper". The frame end fitting also has the integral retaining flange like the 3898231 hose. However, the caliper end fitting has the turned down, machined area like the 3770240 hose, the difference being that the remaining hex portion of the fitting is shorter than the 3770240 fitting. The hex fitting has the number "1502" stamped in small characters on one side and an unreadable manufacturers' logo on the other side. The fittings are zinc or cad plated and there is NO dichromate finish. Both of the hoses that I have show no markings or stripes whatsoever on the black hose, but, it is possible that these have faded out.

    The mid-75 until 1982 hose, GM #357793, has short, deep crimps on both fittings. The frame end fitting has the integral retaining flange. The caliper end fitting has the 1-1/8" long hex, similar to the 3898231 hose and has the inscription "5157y" with the manufactures' logo, a stylized "W", stamped into it in very small characters. Both fittings are zinc plated with a very bright dichromate finish. The black hoses have short, white line segments and the inscriptions "DOT-AV-08-1/8-HL" and "AV-3.2-8870-U8216".
    In Appreciation of John Hinckley
  • Wayne M.
    Expired
    • March 1, 1980
    • 6414

    #2
    Re: 63-82 Brake Hoses

    Joe, that's some extensive research --- I'd replaced many age-cracked hoses w/C-clip on the midyears that I've owned (no '67's), but could never prove that they were the originals. After my post of a few weeks ago, I came across a detailed picture of one with the clip in the '63 Corvette Shop Manual, Section 5, Fig 29. Also, some recent aftermarket hoses have a horseshoe (Omega ?) clip.

    Question 1: In my '70 GM parts catalogue, the hose is refered to as an "assembly". How does the General use this term -- composed of parts from different manufacturers (w/different part #s ?) that were assembled at the final part-builder ? Can an assembly be dis-assembled, serviced, and put back together without destroying the part ?

    Question 2: As a consequence of your research, should brake hoses now be a candidate for judging ? They're certainly easier to verify than some casting #s. Of course, someone would have to start reproducing the various types no longer available. In general, what is the process by which additional knowledge about the configuration of these cars get added to the originality evaluation criteria -- perhaps the judging chairman or team leaders could address this point.

    Comment

    • Joe L.
      Beyond Control Poster
      • February 1, 1988
      • 43202

      #3
      Re: 63-82 Brake Hoses

      Wayne----

      As far as components that GM describes as an "assembly" are concerned, this usually simply means a part that is composed of more than 1 individual, piece. The brake hose, for example, is composed of two end fittings and one length of hose. Sometimes, parts that are composed of several, seperate pieces are not described as an assembly, even though they are.

      For the most part, though, components which GM describes an "assembly" are not field serviceable or, certainly, are not intended by GM to be field serviceable. Usually, GM does not even sell the individual parts of non-field serviceable assemblies, although aftermarket vendors might. In fact, that's usually a sure-fire way to determine if GM intends for the assembly to be field serviceable; if they sell component parts, it's field serviceable and if they don't sell component parts, it's not field serviceable. The assembly is the "lowest common denominator" as far as GM is concerned for field service of that part of the vehicle. Very often, when folks try to repair a non-field-serviceable GM assembly by replacing individual parts, they find out why GM intended for the unit to be serviced as an assembly only.

      As far as judging of the brake lines go, I believe that NCRS provides that these components not be judged since they are a critical safety-related item. They don't want folks using old, deteriorated brake lines just to avoid a few points penalty. I consider that a good policy although I can't understand why anyone would use deteriorated, safety-related parts for the sake of a few points. I know they will, though. My intent in providing the information was NOT to suggest that the brake lines be judged, but simply to present the information for anyone that is interested from an historical perspective. And to answer your question in a complete(maybe too complete!) manner.
      In Appreciation of John Hinckley

      Comment

      • Gene M.
        Extremely Frequent Poster
        • April 1, 1985
        • 4232

        #4
        Re: 63-82 Brake Hoses

        Joe I agree that brake hoses should not be judged. An old hose may look OK on the outside but the hole inside may have closed up. This becomes serious when brake fluid is hindered from making it's way to the brake caliper or wheel cylinder. I don't know of anybody that deducts for brake hoses. The only suggestion I would make is to remove the current day ink text on the outside hose so it looks more closely to original. Maybe even try to duplicate the original ink patterns.

        Comment

        • Terry M.
          Beyond Control Poster
          • September 30, 1980
          • 15588

          #5
          Re: 63-82 Brake Hoses

          Wayne,

          What Joe and Gene are stating is true. We generally don't judge brake hoses for the reasons they cite.

          In general if you want to include additional information in the judging criteria the team leader is your point of contact. Send him your information and state your case.

          As far as reproductions of brake hoses go the government has got into the parts business in many more ways than most folks know. Currently produced brake hoses have a very differnet crimp pattern on the ends than originals - thanks to government regulations.

          FYI: air conditioning hoses also suffer the same problem.

          Terry


          Terry

          Comment

          Working...
          Searching...Please wait.
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

          Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
          An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
          There are no results that meet this criteria.
          Search Result for "|||"