The Stovebolt Site Forums The Parking Lot '60-'66 Trucks Replacing 1962 Brake Lines Help!

I recently got a brake line kit from Eckler's and I ran into what I believe top be a big problem. From what I could see, the brake lines in the kit were all very different shapes and sizes than the original brake lines on the truck. I know that I as sent the correct item, but before I contact them to make a return I want to ask if anyone else has used their kit. If so, is it meant to be identical brake lines? Or are they just "close enough"?

I was disappointed when saw the lines because they cost $160 dollars and they don't even seem to be correct.

Many brake lines are shipped "bent" to fit in a box. There should be instruction on how to unfold if that was the case. Otherwise I see the stainless steel kit and I suspect that it is correct for a stock 1962 truck. They would have corrected any errors by now.

As suggested confirm the long line is not folded. Otherwise confirm each line for fit. It should be fairly intuitive where each line goes. I have had 1 line in the kit with 1 bend 180 degree out. Once confirmed with confidence they shipped that 1 line corrected. Let us know what you find.

What model '62 truck do you have? (C series, K series, Panel, 1/2T, 3/4T, something bigger?) Is it an Automatic or a Manual transmission.

All these things can affect your brake lines.

It's a C10 1/2 with a 3 speed manual.

My replacement "kit" for my 62 long w/b fleetside was a joke. It had a few lines close and they could be used but one was not close to fitting.
I debated with my self if I should just make my own and thought the "kit" would be easy. Never again. and I have had for years the flair tool
and a few benders.
Now there is a new alloy of tubing that is easy to bend and will not rust like the steel ones did. And not hard like the stainless.
The poor fit was from about four years back and hopefully today they are near perfect. But now I just do it the way I was taught and just bend my own.
Sorry I do not remember what the new tubing is called but in my mind that is the way to go.

I converted the 66 Imp. to a dual system and the new stuff is a breeze to work with. You can form it with your hands and not kink or collapse it.
If everything is new and dry you might want to use DOT 5 fluid. It is not hydroscopic and will not damage paint. Do not mix it with DOT 3 or 4.
Good luck. Howie

I agree with Howie. The new copper allow brake tubing is easy to work with & you can form it yourself. All parts stores carry it now. It comes in various lengths . Get a length equal or longer then the one you are going to replace. Most are in 10 in increments. For extra long lengths get 2 pieces & a connecting union. This also makes installing long lengths easier. Cut off excess & double flare the end. Get a good double flare flaring tool. It doesn't have to be a high doller fancy one but avoid a rear cheapie. Every guy has made the mistake of flaring the end before putting the fitting on. So be forewarned.

George

I have used the copper alloy brake line on two frame off projects, 1950 Chevy COE and 1937 Chevy pick up. As I understand it, this is called Cunifer (using the notations for copper, Cu and nickel, Ni in the name). This is used on some high end European cars. I had never done brake line work before, as I am not a mechanic but a retired pathologist. Not one of my flares has ever failed, leaked or split. As noted above, it is very easy to bend but it will kink if you are not careful. I have purchased the tubing, in 25 foot lengths from Fedhillusa.com. as well as their flaring tool. On the latest project I bought NAPA's version of the product and noticed the tube walls seemed thinner. I called Fedhill and they said they get their product from Great Britain, and they traded me my 25 ft roll for one of theirs. I compared the weight of each roll and theirs was about 18% heavier. Whether that makes a difference in performance I don't know. From now on, though, I will be buying their product for future projects or repairs.

Regarding using DOT 5, I have never used it but I have read you must be sure that all of the rubber cups in the cylinders must be compatible with silicone. I am not sure how you do that. Recently, I helped a neighbor with brake issues on a 70s RV he was restoring. The RV had the brake system converted to DOT 5 and the vehicle had been stored in Phoenix, not exactly a humid or wet environment. All of the cylinders were rusted and you could see where the water/silicone interface was. With conventional brake fluid, DOT 3/4, water mixes with the fluid. That is bad in that steel lines will rust from the inside out but it is also good that the fluid continues to function, and if you bleed the system occasionally, the water is removed. With silicone there is no mixing and it will layer out as I witnessed. I know there are people who have used DOT 5 successfully but I intend to stay with DOT 3 and just bleed the brakes occasionally as they were designed.

Kent