MTFCA Forum

Continuing with the brakes, I thought I should do the brakes for the cars as well.

I'm not sure you can even get cast iron shoes without linings as Ford made them. Since they were what came on the car originally, that's why they're on the drawing and the lined shoes are noted as accessory styles.

As for the cam sleeves, I found these on a car once and have noticed that vendors do sell them. Myself I usually just rip them off whenever I find them and install a NOS cam if I've got a couple, if not I'll spring for new from a vendor.

Good show Brother Mart .

Revision 1-A, had the wrong end cap, changed it out for the Ford cap.
Added bolt heads to the differential housing.

If anybody notices anything else that isn't correct, please let me know, thanks.

Revision 1-B
Forgot upper radius rod bolt to nut guide line.

(damn! Must be getting old, that's a newbie mistake).

Beautiful stuff as usual Martynn. Thanks for posting it.

Martin, I don't know if this applies with one piece shoes like the originals and the latest one piece lined shoes, but if using two piece shoes, the hooks on the springs should be orientated with the open end to the outside. That way, the two piece shoes will be pulled back against the backing plate, rather than canted towards the brake drum.

Allan from down under.

Allen, yes Don Lang informed of that also...

I just forgot to post it here.

Excellent drawing.

Although it might just be me, but you might want to take a second look at the spring mount that bolts to the backing plate.

It looks like it might be upside down.

They're not upside down, they're the wrong ones. I went and had a look under my car (22 Touring). But rear perches always fit with the bushing up or on top.

The shackle holds the spring beneath the perch, so it can move unhindered when the spring flexes.

Martyyn, that is the perch correction I was referring to on the 26-7 drawings. The perch rises up and then arcs inwards, with the shackle hole 'hanging' from it.
Allan from down under.

The perch for a 1926-27 looks like this. Due to the large backing plate the axle end is higher up and the plate extends about an inch above the top of the axle end. That large hump below the nut is to accommodate the spring as it flexes below the perch.

This is a 26 rear Axle, notice the perch, how it juts right out of the end of the axle housing, there is no upward bend? Also notice the recess under it for the spring flex clearance.
That divot corresponds to the re-enforced bulge that sort of looks like a hydraulic brake cylinder on the other side.


These are the correct perches for 1914-1925. The ones for 1909-1913, look almost the same with the except that there is no arch to its spring side, like on these. They're flat along that side.

Unless your Australian cars are different...please let me know and I'll draw them too.

That's it Martyyn. for the early ones. The curve in the perch is upwards and inwards. I had some of the 26-7 type, labeled as such, in my swap meet stocks, and was hoping I had not mis-labeled them.

Allan from down under.

Hi All

Here is a picture of one installed.

Part 3848 is upside down.



Still a great drawing.

Guys, in the first drawing Martyyn has the perch looking like it is up side down, only because the curve heads inwards and then arches upward. In his last drawing he has changed the perch to reflect that the curve starts upward and then arches inward, as in fact it does. This is shown in the later photo with the two early perches.
I admire his ability in making these drawings, and respect his willingness to get them absolutely correct.

Allan from down under.

Hi Allan

I see the correction in the second drawing now. I was focusing on the original.

Projecting curves in isometrics can sometimes lead to interesting views.

I also appreciate the drawings. They help to show how the parts go together. Something that Ford didn't get around to for the Ts.