3046moparcoupe

I've attached some pics of the lower half hood lock that I removed from our P15 a few years back. I removed the part, cleaned it up and painted it, bagged and tagged the misc. parts,....and put it all away to wait for the day it could be bolted back up in place. Attached the spring this evening and noticed that it rubs the lever arm at about dead center on the spring. (see attached pic #2 )..nothing looks bent and everything feels tight.......doesn't appear to me that it would prevent things from working, but did seem like it would have been real easy to eliminate this by building the forward attaching post about an 1/8 inch taller, ( heck maybe they wanted it to rub to keep it from rattling. ) Then started trying to determine if someone might have replaced with an incorrect spring. My oem parts book shows the following: pg:95, Group Code 15-11-16, pp# 906 066, Desc: Spring Hood Locking Bolt (5 coil) ??? well it's definitely got a lot more than 5 coils,...couldn't find any pics on the internet to help identify what a 906 066 spring should look like, however did find an ebay seller with a supposedly NOS lower latch plate and spring (see attached pic #1), which looks pretty much like the spring I have. Trying to confirm if I have the correct spring on this hood lock assy. Probably hard to tell if your spring is a match, or rubs, etc.. just by eyeballing, if it's all bolted up on the car. Thought I'd post anyway and maybe get lucky if someone has an assy and/or spring laying around they might be able to look at for me, or if you possible have calipers that will allow you to reach down and measure the diameter, that would help. I may also try messaging the ebay seller to see if he would measure the diameter of the spring he has to see if it's a match, however figure my chances of getting a response back, or accurate info.... are way better here on the forum.. All reply's welcome. We appreciate the help. Steve

Thank you Mack & Tom, I sure do appreciate the reply's back. I have heard many times here on the forum that I overthink things - which probably limits the amount of replys / help I receive back from folks. not complaining about that, I understand completely,..they are probably 100% correct...all I can say is it's not an attempt on my part to try and impress anyone or outdo anyone, it's just the way God made me I suppose...in my previous occupations, it always was a plus for me and allowed for a successful boss/employee relationship, however that doesn't seem to be so much the case here on the forum,....I do want to stress however, that without the forum, and without all the help I have had from it's members over the last few years, I would not be where I am today with this project....the knowledge here is superb..I raised 5 boys, did pretty much all the wrenching on my vehicles and their's when they were still home,..but working on 70's and 80's and 90's stuff is quite a bit different than this old 40's... Tom, I will definitely check out the S10 wiper motor recommendation...that's about as helpful a reply back as anyone could have provided...many thanks.. Steve.

Hello Mack, thanks for the reply back,...no, I've got no V8, mines still a stock 218 as well,...I went ahead and took the motor apart, it was full of dried grease, cleaned it all up,....the external parts that were froze up, were the connectors that attach the motor to the linkage arms, (they wouldn't spin), biggest issue I have now, is that the parking/sealing washer (located on the internal paddle) was starting to fray apart. So I drilled out the rivet and removed it. Need to replace that thin little piece and can't for the life of me decide what would be the best thing to use....whats gonna hold up and last....I'd like to keep it simple and just use the same thing as original, but no one in internet land seems to know what the original material was. It's usually referred to as the leather exhaust washer, or the parking washer...however it looks like some kind of a canvas material....this thin (.010) material is what the vacuum from your intake manifold pulls against 100% of the time when your not using your wipers....so it's what's prevents you from having a vacuum leak condition associated with the vacuum wipers...I've been reading about epdm, nioprine, etc...looks like I could find a suitable washer from a rebuild kit for just about any kind of vacuum wiper, but they seem to be hard to track down, sorta like hen's teeth.....:)

after posting this, I found some pics on here from past posts that do show rubber grommets, it even gave a part number for the grommets through a site called Collectorsautosupply, and listed a part # 1239271as being correct for multiple years of Mopar, however then the info appears to have been retracted as a disregard, stating that the grommet changed in yr 1949...?? another thing I learned after finding the past post referenced above, is that the hex shaped brass looking linkage connectors that the linkage arms attach to, are supposed to swivel,...mine we're froze tight,....so with a little pb blaster soaking, one spins freely as it should, the other is turning - however the entire rivet, hex nut and clip connection area is all turning, not just the hex nut spinning on the shaft as it should, like connector #1....I rigged up a way to let the connector #2 soak in a thimble full of pb blaster, to continue to try and free it up. Not sure, now that the shaft itself is turning, and if I can get the hex nut to freely spin - how critical it will be to try and get that shaft to remain stationary again, oh well, one thing at a time I suppose. again any and all replys are welcome and appreciated. Steve

Working my way through either rebuilding the vacuum motor or replacing with a Newport electric wiper motor setup. Question please regarding the vacuum motor and linkage I pulled out from under the dash of this car, (see 2ea pics attached).. The main wiper drive arm coming off the motor (approx. 2" and "V" shaped) has 2ea small brass, hexagon shaped, connectors that look like a normal brass nut that's riveted solid in place on each end of the arm. Each connector also has a nipple with a groove on the top side that accepts a clip that prevents each linkage arm from falling off. The ends of each linkage arm have nothing but a round 7/16 hole in them. Would I be correct in assuming that there should be a rubber grommet for the hole in each linkage arm ? Also trying to rule out the possibility of these not being oem linkage arms, etc...my parts book isn't helping me answer this, as it has the wiper assembly pretty much lumped all together under a different mopar part number. The part numbers I see on the arms are as follows: passenger side shows the number 205 and also a part # 7862612, driver side shows the number 206 and also a part # 7862512. These look to be TRICO part numbers, and doing a quick internet search on them brought back nothing. So far in dis-assembling this car, it has proven to be all original - so I guess the odds are in my favor that these are the correct parts - but quickly as I type that out here in this post, I am reminded of what the director of engineering once told me,,...that being - Steve - you know what assume stands for don't you ? what ? guaranteed to make an a## out of you and me.. thanks for the help and direction with this. Steve.

thanks for all the reply's back... found and ordered this off of amazon today, Colorplast Black High Heat Chemical resistant Rattle and Squeak prevention tape.....$9.95 free shipping, high heat = 125C, 1.2mm thick 19 mm wide, 5 meter roll. Looks almost dead on in material and size as to what I found when I took things apart...

Barefooting

Wondering if some of you builders out there who have had your P15 dash removed, might be able to help me in preventing the potential for rattles, rubbing, etc.. I should be putting the dash back in the 46 Club Coupe project soon. When I remove parts I like to try and do as thorough a bag-n-tag job as possible as my memory is only a fraction of what it used to be In looking back at my removed parts bin, I found my little Tupperware bucket marked front window trim, from 3yrs ago - with the note and pieces you see in attached pic #1. The two ea black rubber type spacers are looking pretty crumbly - might be able to carve some new ones if I can find a suitable material, if anyone knows of a re-pop on this part - that would of course be great as well...anyway - per my note you see in the pic. I show them going between the dash and the trim along with the white piping cord - on the bottom edge of the garnish molding. What I failed to do was document where the thin, 5ea., pads (kinda looks like a canvas material), were at. Since I didn't include it in my trim drwg., I believe these pieces went underneath the dash, around the screw holes across the top of the dash, between the dash and the metal support underneath. ?? This stuff is too far gone to reuse, so one way or another I'll need to find good replacement materials for the canvas and rubber pieces....so if you've been there and done it - your tips or help would be most welcome. Not really so crazy about trying to be original, even though that's OK, mostly just looking for good lasting results in regards to preventing rubbing and rattling. One thing I noticed, in searching the internet looking for pictures, maybe an exploded dash drwg diagram, etc...was that many of the P15 dash pictures I saw seemed to show piping sticking out on both sides of the window trim, others looked to have piping all the way around the window,...etc.. With the window trim being easily removed, I suppose I could experiment a bit in getting it mounted up nice and snug,...but I'm thinking it would be nice to get the dash mounted correctly the 1st time. thanks in advance, all reply's welcome and appreciated. Steve

OK, maybe this will be of help to someone else out there trying to learn. I went over to Ft Worth Starter and Generator this morning, and they confirmed without me showing them anything in the book, the metal washer goes next to the commutator, then the fiber washer goes on the shaft last, before the end cap that holds the brushes. The little pad (which I did not have), is /was just a circular piece of felt, that he said was original soaked in oil for lubrication,...he said now a days he just puts a little wheel bearing grease inside the bushing and puts-em together. Nice folks over there at Fort Worth Starter and Generator. onward through the fog. Steve

Tim, this reply is sorta redundant on what you said in your 1st reply back,...you definitely understood my questioning.......but I'm not seeing the part # 672641 you mention - in my manual. The 648387 washer at .065 is a match for my manual but it only shows a qty of 1ea. and lists it as steel, on the commutator end....I just measured my steel washer and It's very close at .067. Manual I'm looking at lists both washer descriptions as thrust. The 641446 washer at .031 is what my P15 manual shows for the second washer type, at a qty of 2ea...it lists it as "fiber thrust", so according to what I was seeing in my manual, that would be the 2ea washers found on opposite ends of the armature shaft. Also not seeing any reference to notes at the bottom of the page regarding these 2ea washer part numbers. Maybe a parts list manual , issue version, difference ? don't know.. maybe a manual error ? I also just measured my fiber washer and it is also very close to what the book calls for, again I'm 2 thousands over at .033 thick. Here's a couple more pics at what I'm looking at here manual wise....on the front of my manual its also states "ISSUED JANUARY 1946 This parts list cancels and supercedes D-11078, CHRYSLER CORPORATION PARTS DIVISION DETROIT 31 , MICHIGAN D-11082 My starter part number off the starter Id plate is 1113119. S.

Dis-assembled my starter for a cleanup and new coat of paint. Since I've only got two hands and felt the need to be super careful (as I'd never taken a starter apart before) I had the starter assembly sitting vertically on its Bendix end in a small box padded with bubble wrap to hold it still while I removed the end plate and then pulled the armature out of the housing...probably overdone but I like to be careful with stuff,...anyway being pleased with the dis-assembly at this point, I looked down and noticed 2ea washers laying on the table top which I had not seen until that moment. Each about the size of a quarter with one being metal and the other a poly insulator type material. A quick look at the starter diagram in my parts manual, and it showed the two washers, located on the armature shaft, on the commutator end of the armature. I have attached 2ea pictures from the manual showing the washers. The manual also shows the washers to be A): pp# 641 446 fiber washer at 2ea and B):pp#648 387 steel washer at 1ea...3ea total ?? (finally found the 2nd fiber washer located on the opposite end of the armature shaft). Two questions please for those in the know 1): I believe the steel washer needs to go next to the commutator and then the fiber washer would go on the end to insulate and keep bushing grease up inside the bushing and off the commutator and brushes. The manual also shows a note for the steel washer that reads "commutator end", so that would support the previous sentence as well, in my peanut head..?? 2): The exploded view diagram also shows a 3rd part listed as a pad, which would be located on the end of the armature shaft to pad the end of the shaft against the end plate. manual also shows the pad listed as "end felt". I would expect my felt pad dis-integrated a long time ago, anyway - what's the best thing to do here,....take a 1/16", 1/8", 1/4" thick piece of felt and cut out a small circular pad, grease it, and insert it into the bushing hole of the end plate, when I assemble ? I have some new moly wheel bearing grease I thought I would use for greasing the shaft/bushing ends, if that's not a good choice let me know, I would think any bearing grease would be ok, just not using too much !! but again if I was a pro at this I sure wouldn't be asking , would I ? And for those reading or wondering, nope I didn't paint the indivual ends of the starter housings and end plate where the main ground is delivered from the engine flywheel cover to and thru the starter when it is bolted up. Yeah - maybe there's hope for me yet.. All reply's and responses are welcome, I really appreciate learning from the forum which I do believe has some of the best knowledge anywhere - regarding these awesome old rides...I realize I can get pretty caught up in the details - but I'm hoping that attention to detail will not only further my education but also help make for a better overall car when done. thanks in advance for the help, again...!! Steve G.

Greg , I'll send you a PM.....S.

Thanks Andy & Greg for the input....I was with ya on the attaching to the floor pan 1st thing....I'll be drilling new holes thru new sheet metal, so I've visualized in my head the need for a bit of exactness in getting the hole locations drilled...it was the thought of that rubber having to expand that far that really had me seeing the splits,.....the reminder about hot and cold is excellent, ( not in just that the heat will expand things a bit, but also it will soften the material up some) ... I do still have what's left of the old pedal ( which is an exact match for the one I just got ) - and the only grommet hole left in it, is the hole at the top of the pedal where the linkage going through the firewall attaches. On that old pedal - in that one remaining grommet, the small hole is quite a bit larger than all the small entry holes in this new pedal....(which would stand to reason that it's that way due to wear),...but one never knows. I would be the guy that gets this nice, nos, old original, gas pedal for a reason, like maybe it was defective at the time of mfg , etc...so I also thought it might give me a bit of insurance if someone had possible experienced something similar.. the 3/16 measurement of the smaller entry holes does also match the diameter of the small part of the neck on both the ball studs and the linkage, so I see how it will be a snug, interference type fit....probably what ya want non your accel pedal Steve

I was able to pick up a NOS oem accelerator pedal for our P15 project car, ( pp#974405 Black). Also, thanks to the forum - today I picked up 2ea of the Napa #735-1896 ball studs. Both the pedal and the studs are shown in the picture I've attached to this post. The pedal wasn't cheap, so I'm moving carefully on this one, (and as many of you here on the forum are aware, sometimes it don't take much of a curve ball to strike this ole batter out),..so in support of the ole saying "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure",..I'm gonna reach out again to the members here for a little confirmation - if possible. In theory, I get it,...the pedal pushes down onto the ball studs at the heel of the pedal to attach it to the toe board/floor pan),....but the combination of the hardness of the rubber of the pedal and the size of the ball studs (3/8" ball) has me a bit pinched up wondering if I'll destroy the heel of this pedal. I took a small piece of copper wire as a depth/width gauge and probed around inside the two pedal holes, and the interior of the holes do appear to be the same or very close to the same size as the round oval countersinks you see at the opening of each hole. The countersink hole openings measure at 3/8" and the ball studs measure at 3/8 ".... but the smaller dimension of the pedal hole opening is only 3/16" (half the size of the ball stud), so that small hole opening of the pedal has to expand/flex out TWICE it's current size, to accept the ball of the ball stud and allow it to pass through and into the hole,...also measuring from the top side of the counter sink hole opening - to where the small hole opening inside opens up into the larger 3/8 opening inside the pedal = is 3/16" deep....looks to me like it would be the splits just waiting to happen :). I would expect a little rubber treatment slick-em (like Mcguiars, etc...) would be smart to help things slide into place...anyway any feedback from folks whom have dealt with this - would be greatly appreciated....(the rubber of the pedal seems to be in great shape and the pedal doesn't show any signs of having ever been installed. When I say the rubber is hard, it's not cracked anywhere, it's just a very high density, super firm type rubber, I can take a finger nail and press in on it and see it give a bit, to try and be more descriptive), since obviously the condition of the rubber material would be key as to this working successfully as Walter originally designed and intended it to work......just trying to head off any variables that might have occurred over the years,... wondering if it would be wise to try and open those inner 3/16" holes up a bit so they wouldn't have to flex so far when installing and removing this pedal ? Many thanks Steve

I don't suppose this is a big problem. Seems as though many folks here on the forum are successfully driving their P15's with the Monroe 31000 shocks on the rear - and that's a good thing. However, after pulling our rear end, replacing seals and bearings, new paint, etc...then upon putting it all back together....I had a heck of a time getting the Monroe 31000's on the car.. Problem being, the leaf springs had to be compressed quite a bit to get the shock on, due to it's maximum travel of 19.5 inches. With our P15 being stripped down to bare bones, I didn't have enough weight to use a floor jack against the springs, as they would start flexing about 3/4 inch or so then the car would just start to raise, anyway I wrestled around with it and finally found I was able to get the shocks on if I just raised one side at a time. During this exercise, I was reading through forum posts here where folks have experienced the Monroe 31000 shock eyes breaking off, also a instance I believe where shock mounts were being broken, discussion about the need to do additional welding on the shock eye's of the Monroe's...etc... In respect to the above, I am thankful for one fellow on here who posted about going to Auto Zone, where they cross referenced from Monroe over to the Gabriel shock and came up with part #81147. Here's my reason: the travel length specs on the Monroe 31000 = 12.0 " collapsed x 19.5 " extended. the travel length specs on the Gabriel Guardian 81147 = 12.370 " collapsed x 20.240 " extended. So far, this old car I bought from a collection located in Monroe Lousiana has been 100% honest in regards to original parts. (Only thing I've found that wasn't spec, was the clutch fork spring brkt was missing and they had a make shift spring attached elsewhere)...anyway - I held on to the old Monroe shocks that I took off this car,..see attached pics below (now of course, I'm not saying these Monroe shocks are original, certainly they are not,...but they've been on here an awfully long time....with on signs of ill wear that I can see. the travel length spec I'm measuring on the Monroe 1000's that came off this car matches the Gabriels almost to a T, at around 12 1/4 " collapsed x 20 5/16 " extended. (just using a tape measure as shown below) Here's the info off the old Monroe shocks : MONROE MATIC patent 4113072 MADE IN USA 1000 H11E1D Previously when I had such a heck of a time trying to get the Monroe 31000's on my car, I stopped and called Monroe tech support, and I gave them the numbers you see above, that came off my old shocks, and I was told YES - the new shock number is 31000.... Anyway - with the Gabriel specs being almost a perfect match to the old shocks that came off this car, and in respect to the issues described above, I removed the Monroe's and installed the Gabriels today. Took about 30 minutes to get the Monroe's off, and about 10 minutes to put the Gabriels on. This forum has helped us out so very much. I can't tell ya how much it is appreciated. I hope that possible this will be of help to another member here on the forum. Also, I'm not real big on Auto Zone, (had a bad experience with them years ago and have pretty much always been an oreilley's or napa guy, ever since...anyway - $15.00 ea for the Gabriel shocks at Auto Zone.....that's cheaper than the mail order guys. Steve

Will do guys, earlier today when laying under the car (the turnbuckle type adjusting rod is connected between the pedal and the torque shaft),.... I started backing off on the adjust rod and it looked as though the downward movement I was getting was more forward than down, so it didn't seem to be the answer at the time,....if it worked for you guys it's gotta work for me...I'll give it a go again......thank you all. Steve.

Was laying under our P15 today, looking at clearance between my new brake lines and the area where the clutch over center spring will connect to the frame and the torque shaft. Then (as Tim once put it, which this is super funny - a great flash of light went off in the distance !! ) as my mind began to search for " how am I gonna get this stiff spring assembly back in place without tearing me or the car (probably both) up " ??. Typically, depending on the size of the spring,...like with brakes, etc...if I can't pull it with just my hand strength, I use a screwdriver, or (I've got one of the old brake spring remove/install tools which looks like a crooked bar with a cupped end that grabs hold to a metal hole edge or stud), anyway - with this spring being about the size of a hood spring, I can't even make the thing budge with just hand force),...so I read through all the forum posts I could find on over center springs,....found a lot of info on adjustment of the spring, but unless I missed it - didn't really find anything concerning installation, except one fella who stated that he used some 3/8 steel cable and a turnbuckle, and four hours later he finally got it in place.... In searching outside the forum, I found the picture attached. Where the same question was being addressed in regards to the old Ford cars. Hoping folks might share the best way to install an over center spring on a 1946 P15. So far the method shown in the attached picture is the only thing I've stumbled across that seems do-able. I hated not to ask here, as more than once - I have been shown here on the forum, a very simple way to complete a task that I was trying to make more difficult than necessary. Thanks again for trying to educate an old "parts replacer" into something that more resembles a real, old car mechanic. Steve

Thank you guys for the reply's back. Welded it in yesterday, however when I drilled out the hole - I found a soft spot (poor weld up inside the hole),....so I welded it back in again today - and resurfaced it smooth AGAIN with a flat file...heck if I find another hang nail area, on the inside when I drill it out, I may just have to use a bushing as well. Today - when I welded this again, I left the heat up on this wire feed welder, but slowed my wire down a bit and stayed in the hole a bit longer , I shall see.. most of my welding experience is in sheet metal repair. Steve

I pulled this bell crank off our P15 project a year or so back. Wire wheeled it, scuffed it up good with a scotchbrite, painted it, and put it aside with the other parts of the linkage. I noticed today that the linkage rod hole that connects one side of the bell crank to the steering column has some slop in it. It's a bit egg shaped from it's original 5/16 diameter to around 3/8, (so about 1/16th of slop) Any reason I shouldn't just weld in the sloppy hole and then re-drill it out ? I figure this bell crank is cast iron, and I've read about issues with welding on cast iron manifolds (course manifolds have to endure heat extremes that this part would never encounter), anyway - hoping to freshening this part up with the welder and drill press - if possible. Thanks again for the continued help with our project, and my restoration work education Steve

AndyDodge and DonC : thank you both - your input is always helpful & good...helps a lot on this end...:) Don - I found the 2 pics in your photobucket , under brakes, where you show the inside of the disc the suspension and a great shot of the house route,.....best as I can tell, it looks to be an exact match for how I have my hose routed ( after Mark at Scarebird suggested I rotate the hose orientation down 90 degrees ) . Definitely makes me feel better about it all. Very helpful, thank you both. Steve

Well I've been stuck on this too long, time to make a decision and move forward. (that said - this reminds me of a little game I play out in the garage when working. typically when doing metal work, I'll be going back and forth between my die grinder, wire wheel, and disc grinder,..all of which plug into the electrical outlet/extension cord.....I'll grab the cord and just try to plug it in without looking at which blade on the plug is the wider blade and which blade is the thinner,...a person should have a 50/50 chance of getting it correct !! right I don't believe I've ever gotten the plug clocked correctly the 1st time,..I mean EVER,...honestly kinda freaks me out how anyone could be wrong every time......oh well - enough of my little game.....in regards to these hoses...... Mark from Scarebirds reply back was, " to rotate the banjo connection at the caliper down 90 degrees " reference where I had the hose mounted in the previous pictures shown earlier in this post " so I made a note of his reply.....then I had the brain fart to mount up the wheel and tire onto the hub to see how things looked with that introduced into the mix....at 1st things looked ok, but as I turned the wheel through the entire steering range circle, the brake hose got very close to the edge of the rotor disc and the tire itself, again - does not look right...and remember I had to file off material from the edge of the caliper to get the hose to even try and tighten up evenly and not be cocked, in this configuration.....(honestly that was a big flag in my mind that the hose shouldn't be mounted this way, but the opposite end of the hose which attaches to the frame brkt had to be filed on since you can't put a hexagon shaped connector bezel into a round hole :), so maybe this end of the hose has to be modified as well ?.....I hope you can see where I'm going with this - it just seemed like there was no way I could figure this out by trying to use common sense or read between the lines... So I flipped the hose over to take advantage of the inward bend created by the way the banjo connector is angled and re-attached....with the hose flipped over and mounted this way, it clears the caliper and routes down much lower on it's path towards the frame brkt. Away from the rotor, away from the edge of the tire, but touching the side of the shock absorber when steering turned fully to either the right or the left....I remembered the steering stop posts located on the inner lower area of the a arm, kinda tucked in behind the spindles....and adjusted then out a couple turns which limited my steering travel back a bit and thus prevented the brake hose from hitting the side of the shock absorber. Felling a bit better about the track I was on, I then again rotated the front end through the entire steering circle and found that when fully turned either direction, each hose will come up against the vertical post (support assembly) that connects the lower A arm to the upper A arm,....nothing I can do about it, and this area of the hose that does touch this vertical support has an extra approx. 5" section of protective rubber tubing shrunk down on the hose..also as best I can tell, this vertical support looks to me like it would move vertically in unison with the hose. Mounting up the wheel and tire onto the hub really gave a different perspective to this, but still in the back of my mind I can't help but wonder about that old 50/50 chance thing I keep up with on me getting things wrong, always 1st run through,....so more than likely, I'm wrong with all this,.....we'll see as it also dawned on me that with the car being up on jack stands, certainly it will all look different when it's lowered and sitting on it's own shoes....but that will be no time soon... I want to get the brake system buttoned up and full of fluid asap to prevent corrosion, I guess when I find out I'm wrong in my hose routing, it won't be super difficult to re-do the hoses and flip them over. I was just hoping to maybe get it right the 1st time and to avoid the additional brake fluid mess and re-bleeding,......crush washers are cheap. IT WOULD HELP GREATLY TO KNOW, IF SOMEONE OUT THERE CAN LOOK AT THEIR SCAREBIRD CONVERSION, TO LET ME KNOW IF THE ROUTING OF THE BRAKE HOSE IS LEAVING THE CALIPER POINTING BACK TOWARDS THE CALIPER OR POINTING AWAY FROM THE CALIPER ?? IF YOU LOOK YOU'LL SEE EXACTLY WHAT I MEAN. THANKS EVERYONE FOR YOUR CONTINUED HELP. THIS FORUM HAS SOME SUPER TALENTED FOLKS THAT ARE PATIENT AND WILLING TO HELP.

No Andy, I appreciate you replying back,..this should be grade school simple and I've been staring at it for 2 days now....embarrassing to say the least. I've heard that with "kits" there are things you almost always have to tweak,....and sure enough, for example here, the brake hose end where it connects to the brake hard line at the frame with the clip,....has a round hole in the hose brkt.....the new hoses spec'd out for this application all have an hexagon shaped bezel that won't fit inside the anchor brkt. hole opening . So I took my file and rounded the edges of the octagon shaped bezel until it would slide inside the brkt hole. Very simple really, but it leads me to wonder what else needs modifying that isn't found in any instructions.... Steve...

I believe I've figured out a better way to ask this question regarding the routing of the hoses. If someone out there who has done this scarebird disc kit could look and let me know back.......there is an angle to the banjo fitting connector on this hose and depending on which way you flip it when connecting it to the caliper, the hose is gona either route back towards and over the caliper or route away from the caliper - " so does the brake hose point away from the caliper when connected, or does it point toward the caliper when connected ? " The only way, I can lower the routing of the hose as Mark at Scarebird suggested,....would be to flip the hose over and attach it so the hose routes away from the caliper. Initially this was my 1st choice in mounting the hose, but when I turned my steering full circle, with the hoses attached in this way, the brake hose on the passenger side came up against the side of the shock absorber....I spent some time today looking closer at this hose touching the shock thing, and it appears that the hose it just touching the shock, no more,...maybe I can adjust the steering stop post out a bit to eliminate this,..... Simple but obviously sure has me stumped... Thanks Steve

Andy and Martybose, I really appreciate the reply's back guys,....and I see what your thinking is the bleeder valve down low in the picture (but what your confusing with the bleeder valve is actually the tie rod adjustment nut and bolt), the bleeder valves are on top, I have the bleeder valves covered with the yellow masking tape to keep crap out of the hole in the bleeder valve while I'm messing with this)....the reply I got back from Scarebird was ( to rotate the brake hose end at the caliper down 90 degrees ).

I sent this email with pics to Scarebird a few minutes ago, regarding mounting up the brake hoses to the calipers on my Scarebird brake kit. I would also appreciate any feedback from members who have installed the Scarebird front disc kit on your P15's. Thanks for the help. Steve To Scarebird Today at 12:08 PM Scarebird, Question please in regards to connecting hoses on front calipers. I've attached three pics in reference. Question is in regards to the proper clocking/routing of this brake hose. In attached pic#2 (4888.jpg) you can see the angle of the hose to caliper banjo connector. Question: Initially I loosely mounted this hose up with the hose angle pointed inward (away from routing over the top of the caliper). I did this because mocked up, with crush washers, it aligned up and fit square, nothing hit. But the hose route was tight and did not look like the route I saw in my paperwork. Then I had the brain fart to turn the steering a full left to right, which showed that the hoses would hit the shock absorbers. So I flipped it over and attached as in pic #1 (4887.jpg), pic#3 (4893.jpg) and noticed that the hose route now looked much more like the zerox copy pic I rcvd with my kit. To mount the hose as shown in pic#1 and #3, approx. 1/16th + inch had to be filed away from the lip/edge of the caliper to allow the base of the banjo conn fitting to clear the caliper housing evenly on all sides. (You could see it in the crush washers, as you got snugger with the bolt, the washers were cocking high on the side where the brake hose exits the connector, due to that angle of the connector. Also, with the banjo connector mounted in this position on the caliper, one of the flat edge's of the banjo connector is parallel with the molded cast iron anchor tab of the caliper, however it's not an interference fit at all - there's a small gap present that would allow the banjo connector to move some before the edge of the connector would come in contact with the cast iron tab block.. Am I anywhere close to having this right ? Should the Banjo bolt, when tightened down to adequately crush the crush washers be enough to hold this hose in place ? Trying to be pro-active on this end, although I'm quickly seeing where my years of replacing parts on vehicles can fall short, when it comes to experience and knowledge. Thanks again for your help, ( rounding third almost home with this, I should be good to go after this ). Steve