4g61t.org

Specializing in the 3g CSM
It is currently Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:50 pm

All times are UTC-05:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:03 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:44 pm
Posts: 403
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Quote:
It looks to me like you could just cut and grind the hubs down while they're still on the car until you have enough clearance to fit the GVR4 rotors. This way you won't have to bother with the bearings.
you still have to remove the stock captive rotor though, which means you would need to seperate the hub still.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:35 pm 
Offline
The Silent Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm
Posts: 9364
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
So, for the record what parts would you upgrade from an engineering standpoint to make this a plug and play and 100% safe affair?
Lots of people will read this thread for sure, so I want to get this as correct as possible.

Parts + Techniques

T/E/L + Galant VR4 (?) rotors 276mm vented 4 bolt
1989-92 CSM/Lancer hubs (regardless of turbo or non-turbo) need to be machined at the top edges of the hub face to fit inside your rotor hats
Disassemble wheel bearings with press or like technique
T/E/L (?), Diamante, or VR4 twin pot calipers with 6mm spacers
Reuse all factory bolts in this process, or need for upgrades (see below)?


Engineering point of view

Longer wheel studs have enough thread depth in the stock lug nuts now?

Will factory 14" wheels clear this new set of calipers and rotors, or would 15" be the new minimum for T/E/L with twin pots setups?

Does this new rotor position and subsequent matching position of the calipers and brackets mean that the whole aligned assembly is being moved 6mm outboard and the caliper is not physically moved 6mm outboard without the bracket coming forward too? <- Just for reference because I'm pretty sure that 6mm would leave only one brake pad to work with! :lol:

Is it worth it, to bolt (using the old hub to disc bolts) the new rotors to the hubs from the outside?
Would you recommend new hardware when doing this?

Because of the aforementioned question, will you have to drill 4 new holes in the rotor to accomodate bolting the rotors to the hub in this new fashion (from the outside of the hub surface)?

This will help clear up any issues rather nicely.
Don't be afraid to correct me on anything here, because when it comes to brakes, you cannot take a chance and I do not pretend to know it all. You are just one pedal stomp away from delivering your car into the back of another if things aren't designed properly to work fully in unison. Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely not criticising t04garret, this is the opposite, as I am looking out for people that do not work around brakes all the time, and, that want 100% background on what they are indeed going to be bolting onto their car.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 7:18 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:44 pm
Posts: 403
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Quote:
Parts + Techniques

T/E/L + Galant VR4 (?) rotors 276mm vented 4 bolt
1989-92 CSM/Lancer hubs regardless of turbo or non turbo need to be machined down at the hub center ring
Disassemble wheel bearings with press or like technique
T/E/L (?), Diamante, or VR4 twin pot calipers with 6mm spacers
Reuse all factory bolts in this process, or need for upgrades (see below)?
i also used new longer bolts to bolt the caliper on, 35mm vs the stock 28mm.


Quote:
Engineering point of view

Longer wheel studs have enough thread depth in the stock lug nuts now?
i part number checked the T/E/L GVR4 wheel studs with the C/S/M's and they are the same, i assumed because the T/E/L has the rotor on the outside stock that the studs maybe longer to compensate. that is not the case.
Quote:
Will factory 14" wheels clear this new set of calipers and rotors, or would 15" be the new minimum for T/E/L with twin pots setups?
15"s minimum.
Quote:
Does this new rotor position and subsequent matching position of the calipers and brackets mean that the whole aligned assembly is being moved 6mm outboard and the caliper is not physically moved 6mm outboard without the bracket coming forward too? <- Just for reference because I'm pretty sure that 6mm would leave only one brake pad to work with! :lol:
the whole caliper is spaced out the same amount as the rotor, 6mm, so it align's as per factory, the spacers go behind the caliper bracket inbetween the hub caliper mounts.
Quote:
Is it worth it, to bolt (using the old hub to disc bolts) the new rotors to the hubs from the outside?
Would you recommend new hardware when doing this?
i dont believe so, that would require drilling the rotor, and then your in the same position as before, stuck with captive rotors, but on the other side of the hub, you will also still run into wheel fitment problems as per the stock setup.
Quote:
Because of the aforementioned question, will you have to drill 4 new holes in the rotor to accomodate bolting the rotors to the hub in this new fashion (from the outside of the hub surface)?
see my above reply
Quote:
This will help clear up any issues rather nicely.
Don't be afraid to correct me on anything here, because when it comes to brakes, you cannot take a chance and I do not pretend to know it all. You are just one pedal stomp away from delivering your car into the back of another if things aren't designed properly to work fully in unison. Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely not criticising t04garret, this is the opposite, as I am looking out for people that do not work around brakes all the time, and, that want 100% background on what they are indeed going to be bolting onto their car.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 8:34 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 7504
Location: Stantonsburg, NC
Not sure what I was thinking, I completely forgot that you have to press the hub out to remove the original rotor. It's been a while since I did mine. :P

Also the 92.5+ AWD DSM rotors won't work as they are 5 lug. With the GVR4 rotors on the outside of the hub they are now being sandwiched between the hub and the wheel so I don't see the need to drill them like the original captive rotors.

_________________
89 2 Door Montero V6/Manual
95 Eagle Summit DL coupe
15 Mitsubishi Mirage ES hatch


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:44 pm
Posts: 403
Location: Perth, Western Australia
ah thats right, i forgot that T/E/L's are five stud, you bastards! wish we had more of them here! oh the mag wheel choice! :D


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:25 pm 
Offline
The Silent Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm
Posts: 9364
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
I should say that I was told when I replaced my bearings that it was not the pressing together of the bearings and seals that will determine the squeeze on everything, but rather the axle nut pulling the axle cup inwards is what performs the pre/final loading of the bearings.

t04garrett, is there anything more you want to add to this thread before it gets posted to the archives?


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:32 pm 
Offline
CSM Junkie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:44 pm
Posts: 403
Location: Perth, Western Australia
that all looks good too me,

i dont know if i mentioned this, but i also used a 1" master cylinder and corresponding non-abs twin pot proportioning valve.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 5:10 am 
Offline
Some call me a god
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 2347
Location: Missouri
Quote:
I should say that I was told when I replaced my bearings that it was not the pressing together of the bearings and seals that will determine the squeeze on everything, but rather the axle nut pulling the axle cup inwards is what performs the pre/final loading of the bearings.

t04garrett, is there anything more you want to add to this thread before it gets posted to the archives?
Tim, are you saying that when replacing the bearings, they should be drawn back togather with the axle nuts or they should be completely pressed together and the axle nut will hold the loading on then after the nuts are torqued?

_________________
John
89 Colt GT(2)
88 d50 4g63t, crower 272's, dsmlink


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 8:57 am 
Offline
The Silent Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm
Posts: 9364
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Quote:
Quote:
I should say that I was told when I replaced my bearings that it was not the pressing together of the bearings and seals that will determine the squeeze on everything, but rather the axle nut pulling the axle cup inwards is what performs the pre/final loading of the bearings.

t04garrett, is there anything more you want to add to this thread before it gets posted to the archives?
Tim, are you saying that when replacing the bearings, they should be drawn back togather with the axle nuts or they should be completely pressed together and the axle nut will hold the loading on then after the nuts are torqued?
Well, I pressed mine together, then pressed them back apart because I thought it was too tight, just as others did (starting and rotating torque). In the end, it was pressed back together and then the axle cup did the rest of the work for me. As long as everything is put together properly, you could "probably" just use the axle cup to draw it all back together but that is to archaic for my liking. It leaves too much room for error, or just could be a problem because of the tight confines, and the possibility of damaging the seals.

t04garrett, the 1" master cylinder setup, was that taken from a 3000GT/Stealth or Galant VR4 or ?

We could run in circles discussing this but suffice it to say, how are your experiences with the brake setup or have you yet to run the car with these new bits because of the engine work in progress?


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:09 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 7504
Location: Stantonsburg, NC
I also wonder how this setup would work with the larger Elantra brake booster?

_________________
89 2 Door Montero V6/Manual
95 Eagle Summit DL coupe
15 Mitsubishi Mirage ES hatch


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:19 am 
Offline
The Silent Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm
Posts: 9364
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Elantra = C53a turbo booster, pound for pound they have the same booster ratio. The turbo car has a different valve in the hose from the intake manifold as very close to the booster itself. I think the archives should be upgraded with this because you don't want the booster seeing boost rather than just vacuum. :lol: I was just clued into this by a post on the Galant VR4 site.

Archive post: Forum index ? Information Archives ? General & Suspension (archive)
Swapping Brake boosters/MC from other models

Quote:
Berserko wrote:
Elantra was my next best choice 4:1 same as a turbo colt. Almost identical M/C to a tubo colt only the Elantra has a line shooting from the top at the front if you take the line with the MC then your fine. Now that I had the MC/Booster I thought it was a plug in ad go well it was sort of. It bolted in fine heres were the problems began. I notice the brake pedal even at the top of its stroke had barely any clearence to the floor you could only push the brakes 1.5" until it was laying on the floor. I thought I had screwed up again I did but it wan'y anything terminal on the back of the colt brake booster there was about a .5" of a spacer on the Elantra it has a spacer too but it was about 1.25" and it move the booster so far forward it have a really low pedal. I swapped spacer betwen the colt and Elantra Booster and the pedal came back to the right place things were good. The only other mod needed for this is to hack the wiring harness to accept the fluid level sensor for the elantra M/C infortunately you cannot swap bottle due to design differences in the M/C other than what I have mentioned the swap was a success hopefully it will be worth while after I get my project finished.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:25 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 7504
Location: Stantonsburg, NC
So you're saying that even though the elantra booster is larger its still the same booster? I know the NT and turbo csm's use the same booster from the factory. I had no idea about the valves being different either, good info.

_________________
89 2 Door Montero V6/Manual
95 Eagle Summit DL coupe
15 Mitsubishi Mirage ES hatch


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:29 am 
Offline
The Silent Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 3:32 pm
Posts: 9364
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
CSM 1.5 NA C52a would have the lowest booster ratio ~ 3:5:1
CSM 1.6 DOHC NA C62a 1989 FSM shows 1500 as 3.5:1 and 1600 as 4.0:1 likely (turbo and NA 1600 are likely the same booster, as they have the same brake setups)
CM 1.6 DOHC Turbo C53a = Elantra booster ratio = 4:1

Updated Aug 2014

There is a check valve in the brake booster hose from what I have recently seen.

Likely this is the part number:

http://www.amayama.com/search/?q=MB277029

MB277029

Cyborg 1.6t


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:14 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 7504
Location: Stantonsburg, NC
I had read somewhere that the boosters were the same but a quick check on CAPS confirms that you are correct. The turbo csm's use an 8" booster with a different part # than the rest. I guess the Elantra booster is still a good upgrade for the swap guys using a NT chassis, correct? As long as you use a turbo (dsm?) valve in the line to the IM.

_________________
89 2 Door Montero V6/Manual
95 Eagle Summit DL coupe
15 Mitsubishi Mirage ES hatch


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 12:35 pm 
Offline
Spends Too Much Time Under The Hood

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:18 pm
Posts: 344
Location: orlando, fl
I'm confused (thanks for the link chris), what is this spacer? I have an Elantra brake booster, m/c, and proportional valve in a Colt so that is why i ask.

_________________
91 Galant VR4


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

All times are UTC-05:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited