1975 Front and rear brake hoses

[Lynn S.]

Page 96 of the TIMJC middle of the second paragraph starting: Original brake hoses are rubber ...  The lettering along ... gives the "DOT specifications SAE J1402 AV 1/8 8396".  Then later states "... in 1975 is SAE J1401 AV 1/8 8396".  Which hose goes forward vs rear?  Is 1401 the rear and 1402 the front, vice versa or one number "1401" for both front and rear in 1975?  Thanks in advance for your help.

[Edward J.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Lynn, I not sure where your going with the hoses and the numbers, but the original hoses front or rear have a single crimp at the ends Dot requires a double crimp today, If you are driving your car on a regular basis I am not sure that 45 year old hoses would be safe, brake hoses are a safety item, when judging these hoses I believe they do not deduct for replacement hoses because there a safety item.

[Gary B.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Edward,





Gary

[Joe L.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Lynn, I not sure where your going with the hoses and the numbers, but the original hoses front or rear have a single crimp at the ends Dot requires a double crimp today, If you are driving your car on a regular basis I am not sure that 45 year old hoses would be safe, brake hoses are a safety item, when judging these hoses I believe they do not deduct for replacement hoses because there a safety item.

Edward-------



Not for 1975 and later. There was a change in the front and rear brake hoses for the 1975 model year. The 1975 and later hoses were GM #357793, front, and GM #357794, rear. These hoses do have double crimp end fittings and the fittings have a chromate overplate over zinc. I have several NOS examples of these but I'm not feeling the inclination right now to dig them out to check the printing on the hoses. These hoses also became SERVICE for 1963-74 Corvettes in early 1977.

One clue to reproductions: every reproduction or replacement for these hoses that I have ever seen has a large, removable "C-clip" on the upper end fitting. The above referenced GM hoses DO NOT HAVE such a feature. The original 1967-74 hoses did not, either. I'm not sure about the original 1963-66 hoses. I have some NOS examples of those, too, but I'm still not feeling energetic enough to dig them out.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Page 96 of the TIMJC middle of the second paragraph starting: Original brake hoses are rubber ...  The lettering along ... gives the "DOT specifications SAE J1402 AV 1/8 8396".  Then later states "... in 1975 is SAE J1401 AV 1/8 8396".  Which hose goes forward vs rear?  Is 1401 the rear and 1402 the front, vice versa or one number "1401" for both front and rear in 1975?  Thanks in advance for your help.

Lynn-----


The longer hoses are for the front and the shorter for the rear. It's that simple.

[Patrick H.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Edward,


I think there is some confusion about the judging of brake hoses, both from the perspective of car owners and judges. Some people will say that brake hoses are not a judged item. Based on a concern for safety, the NCRS wants us to use safe rubber hoses that aren’t 50+ years old. The ‘66 TIM&JG says “Judging Guidance: In the interest of safety, horizontal and/or multiple crimps are acceptable for Flight Judging.” But note that that judging guidance does not say that other aspects of the brake hoses should be ignored. For example, some of Corvette repro parts companies sells brake hoses for C2s that have yellow/gold, dichromate ends. While other vendors sell repro hoses with silver zinc ends that are not yellow/gold. And I believe all repro hoses come with inked text on the rubber with DOT markings. Yellow dichromate is not period correct, nor is the DOT text. The JG also says original hoses “have been observed with a red, orange, or white “tracer” running along the length of the hose rubber”. For my ‘66 I purchased repro hoses that have the silver zinc end fittings, not the yellow dichromate. And then I removed the DOT and other modern text using brake fluid as a cleaner, and I painted a white tracer stripe along the rubber using VHT satin white dye. I would argue that the resulting hose looks closer to the original than a hose with yellow dichromate ends and DOT markings. And I think some judges will deduct for hoses that deviate from original hoses in ways other than the single vs double crimped ends.


Gary

I've seen some restorations with NOS single crimp hoses.

I also will deduct for DOT matrix printing that shows a modern date.

As you describe, modern hoses can be made to appear like the originals other than the crimping, and those who do so should be rewarded for their efforts.

[Gary B.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

I've seen some restorations with NOS single crimp hoses...

[Joe L.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Patrick,

I’m sure that’s true. I can only hope those cars are not driven, except into and out of a trailer. Rubber brake hoses were not designed to last 50+ years. The brake system is tested at 1,800 psi. How many people would stake their life on a 50 y.o. rubber brake hose withstanding 1,800 psi in a panic stop? I sure wouldn’t.

Gary

Gary------


I have several NOS GM #3898231 1967-74 brake hoses[none for sale]. Would I ever use them on my car? NEVER.

[Gary B.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Joe,

I could have predicted both things you said.

Gary

[James G.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

I have found replacement single DEEP crimp brake hoses dated on the fittings as late as 1991.
These were Manufactured by weatherhead and if not mistaken Bendix.
Now as far as using them... I know of quite a few high end restored Camaros and corvettes with NOS single crimp- leaf die (long crimp) hoses.

as an aside - If you wanted to make your own the equipment is available to create your own single long crimp hoses for around $1000 - someone in the Mustang restoration business has done this - probably not for individual sale, though you may want to research it.
The weatherhead dies are on ebay for a couple hundred and the ring die crimpers are available in many places - ebay - craigs list etc.
20+ years ago I sold MRO equipment including ring crimpers dies fittings hose when working for Bowman.

[Mike E.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Here are some Weatherhead single-crimp unused, but not stored in a hermetically-sealed environment. Identical, other than ink stamping, to originals that I have taken off and now reside in my brake hose drawer.
brake hoses single crimp (2).jpgbrake hoses single crimp (6).jpgbrake hoses single crimp (3).jpg

[Lynn S.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Thanks to everyone for your feedback. Special thanks to Joe for answering my question as to which hose goes where. I understand and agree about using 50+ year old hoses. Just needed help in know which hose goes where. My car was started by someone else as a restoration and the brake assemblies were not installed when I bought the car, hence my question. Thanks again everyone.

[Joe L.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

All------


I was partially incorrect on some information I provided earlier. Beginning in 1975, the brake hoses did change to GM #357793 and 357794 and the style of crimp used did change. However, it was apparently not a double crimp at that time. I dug out my NOS examples of both of the above [none for sale] and they are single crimp. What I believe is a date code on the rubber component (of the 357793) would indicate these were manufactured in August, 1986. That's generally consistent with when I obtained these 357793 from GM. So, I would say that, based on this, the single crimp brake lines were likely used on Corvettes through the end of C3 PRODUCTION. Of course, observation of 1975-82 Corvettes with their original hoses would be the best confirmation. In any event, at some later time, the crimps on the 357793/357794 SERVICE hoses were changed to the double crimp as I have seen NOS examples of these hoses that were double crimped. Apparently, the crimp style changed via revision to the specs of those part numbers rather than the release of new part numbers. Very unusual for a change like this.

Below are photos of the GM #357793:

DSCN3905.jpgDSCN3906.jpgDSCN3907.jpgDSCN3909.jpg


Below are photos of the GM #357794:


DSCN3899.jpgDSCN3900.jpgDSCN3901.jpgDSCN3902.jpg

I also found several other NOS brake hoses from the 1963-74 period when I was digging these out. I'll be starting separate threads with photos of those.

[James G.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

Both of those hoses also have the Weatherhead TM logo on the fittings.

[Brian G.]

Re: 1975 Front and rear brake hoses

The original hoses on our '75 were all "1401".