Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

[Michael H.]

Does anyone reproduce 1963-66 brake hoses with their original configuration (single long gradual crimp, C-clip retainer, yellow stripe, no DOT markings). I have searched the Archives here and have read about the differences between the original configuration brake hoses and the DOT replacement hoses. I also saw a reference to a fellow named Bill Colorico who reportedly used to make repro brake hoses in the original configuration, but I have been unable to locate him. I asked a Lone Star rep at the Winter Meet last weekend if he knew of anyone who makes the hoses in the original configuration, but to no avail. (I know not to try to use original 50-year old hoses!) Finally, are the '63 to '66 brake hoses even judged? According to the Archives here, many judges overlook the non-original repro brake hoses because they constitute "safety equipment," but that view does not appear to be universal, and there is nothing in the '65 Judging Guide (that I can find) that addresses this issue. Many thanks, as usual.

[John D.]

Re: Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

Michael, My 63 has original single crimp hoses on it. I bought them in the early 70's. I wouldn't dare drive the car with the hoses though.
Yes the hoses are supposed to be judged. CHeck out the judging sheet on that item.

Look on the inside cover of "The Restorer" for Bill as he is a National Judging team leader for '66. John

[Jack H.]

Re: Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

Michael, My 63 has original single crimp hoses on it. I bought them in the early 70's. I wouldn't dare drive the car with the hoses though.
Yes the hoses are supposed to be judged. CHeck out the judging sheet on that item.

Look on the inside cover of "The Restorer" for Bill as he is a National Judging team leader for '66. John

Also online here at ncrs.org: https://www.ncrs.org/contact.php

From that webpage you get the following (note spelling of last name):
1966:

Bill Calorico bajabill676662@msn.com

[Edward J.]

Re: Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

Mike, I think you will find that judging the brake hoses depends on the judge, My reason for saying this I once attended a judging seminar and the point deduct was not even 1 point so it was noted on the judging form ,The fittings NTP. and it is a safety item, just another reason. By the way the new 63/64 JM does not seem to even say anything about the hoses, But???

[Joe L.]

Re: Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

Does anyone reproduce 1963-66 brake hoses with their original configuration (single long gradual crimp, C-clip retainer, yellow stripe, no DOT markings). I have searched the Archives here and have read about the differences between the original configuration brake hoses and the DOT replacement hoses. I also saw a reference to a fellow named Bill Colorico who reportedly used to make repro brake hoses in the original configuration, but I have been unable to locate him. I asked a Lone Star rep at the Winter Meet last weekend if he knew of anyone who makes the hoses in the original configuration, but to no avail. (I know not to try to use original 50-year old hoses!) Finally, are the '63 to '66 brake hoses even judged? According to the Archives here, many judges overlook the non-original repro brake hoses because they constitute "safety equipment," but that view does not appear to be universal, and there is nothing in the '65 Judging Guide (that I can find) that addresses this issue. Many thanks, as usual.

Michael-----


No major brake parts manufacturer would manufacture the hoses with the original-style crimp. That's because this crimp was a SINGLE crimp and DOT regulations for the last 40 years, or so, require a DUAL crimp. I suppose that some individuals might be able to manufacture original configuration hoses for more-or-less "private" sales. I would consider such hoses to be for show cars only.

[Tony S.]

Re: Reproduction '63-'66 Brake Hoses

As a chassis judge on the '65 team, I don't deduct for double crimped hoses because of obvious safety issues with a single crimped hose. I'll deduct for other configuration issues, but not because of the double crimp.