scarebird

no, we get notifications via this board if anything comes up. As far as the rotors hitting the lower bolts - by how much do you think this is? Please email us direct: m@scarebird.com

I KNEW you'd turtle. Facts? no problem. Charlie - if you are following this post, the A17 race/A6 cone bearing combination have different inclusive angles, about a 5th of a degree difference - so the combination will have accelerated wear according to an inquiry of ours to Timken engineering. Even though when fitted together they seem to match - they are different series bearings. Note how the A6 cone sets deeper into the race than a A17 cone. This is why we went through the trouble and expense to CNC a set of 4140 moly steel bushings to adapt the A17 bearing to the original spindle.

cute - just what I would expect from a couple of internet experts... Pat - answer the question if you can...

You're dodging the question so I will spell it out for you. What inner bearing is spec'd out for the Rustyhope kit? If it is the A6 bearing, there is a real mismatch issue verified by Timken - not this whining about marketing nonsense. knuckleharley - as a hockey defenceman I have no issue giving chirpers the lumber - same with business: I do my best for my customers.

Excellent - perhaps you can enlighten me as to which inner bearing Charley uses? As far as I can tell, Rustyhope uses the 77-89 Dippy rotor - which requires an A17 inner bearing. This bearing has a 1.3775" inner bore, so to fit this on the 1.250 spindle stub would require a bushing no? In the picture of his kit I do not see one - was one supplied?

Thank you - I have had many good dealings with Canadians.

About the Navy stuff - good weapons are designed by engineers to be used by music majors during wartime, the simpler to operate/maintain the better: ex. Kalashnikov. I am sure once Charlie's kit is installed it works fine - but who here has not tapped a hole crooked? We eliminated that potential stumbling block along with the cost of the tap - why not mention it? In 1949 Oldsmobile introduce the OHV 303, which made the then King Flattie obsolete. Do you think GM pointed out that the Flattie was old news? you could hang your hat on it. Rockwood - you do have a point. A few years ago I bought into that line of thinking - but now I am more of a 80/20 guy; less stress is a good thing. Bebop - good hearing from you, still dealing with FLAP (good people). Frank, Don, Pat - wish I had the time to worry about trivial stuff...

Guess what? your not - so your opinion does not matter to me. dezeldoc and rollies's opinion however does matter to me because they ARE my customers. I had to Google AMH2 to find out what that was... first hit was a guy who went down in a C2A Greyhound - all 26 lost: cause unknown. We research, test and build this stuff as best we can - stuff like this phantom caliper crop up on occasion and we deal with it.

Easy - the books said you were wrong, but like I mentioned earlier the 73-74's seem hazy*. I would like to see those pix - please email them to me at m@scarebird.com I also took note that in your case the upper bolt was short and have an order at Tacoma Screw for them I will modify - thanks. *We had a customer who had an early 1965 Pontiac - our 1965-66 version stuff did not fit because Pontiac machined the 65 spindle to accept 64 drum hardware.

Thank you for clearing that up. Only 1 in 5 customers bother to tell us they erred - and we wonder if there is a flaw in our product we do not know of.

We had another customer point out this post and need to set a few things straight. 1. We are working with Rollie to find out what is not working and a fix. We have sold quite a few of these with no issue other than the "other" caliper issue. Rollie did not put in the other spacer - hence it will affect the fitment. The rotor may also be undersized in diameter as evidenced by the picture. 2. Some of you seem offended that we do not feel that tapping the existing holes on the spindle is a good solution and point this out in our advertising. I did not mention Rusty Hope by name in this ad; there is at least one other supplier for this application that requires you to tap the holes (and do some heavy grinding on the spindle). We were called in by a local rod shop after they tried to use the latter kit and it failed. They asked us if we could do better. We engineered a strict bolt on - no grinding or tapping (and since this load is almost all shear, 0.105 of grade 8 bolt is much more than enough to do the job). Back in the early part of the last century hand cranking a motor was the norm, with the possibility of injury or death in the event of a backfire. Do you think when the self-starter was perfected it was not touted in advertising? 3. We got beat up on Moparchat.com a few years ago for using GM calipers on a Mopar application (1962-72 B and 70-72 E bodys). We then changed the design to use 1994-99 Ram calipers; and customers whined the parts were too expensive. So I decided to hell with it and use whatever works the best. We have a large inventory of calipers and rotors of all shapes and sizes, from 1969 GTO to 2005 Mustang. In this case we found the 70-74 E body caliper works best: compact, excellent hose routing and it is Mopar - only drawback is it runs about 20 extra per unit - and availability unlike stated by others it is next day at your nearest NAPA or rockauto or partsamerica or autozone or... 4. The phantom caliper. Since I talked to dezeldoc I checked and am still undecided. Hollander, Raybestos, NAPA say unh-uh - 70-74 E are the same. But Hollander shows the 73-74 spindle to be different (?). And I have a March 1980 dated Wagner brake book that shows a 70-72/73-74 split. Without the two different pieces on my bench I withhold judgment. Neither of the two E body guys I know (one a professional restorer) buys that they are different - but in the sales of almost 5000 conversion sets I have seen weirder things... 5. The customer is not always right. Hence we try to make our stuff as foolproof as possible - but as we said in the Navy "foolproof doesn't mean sailor-proof". We do make errors and try to get to the root of the problem with the customer then fix it. We kaizen our stuff; always looking to improve the product and instructions. I believe that is enough for my first post.