• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Master Cylinder for 4-Wheels Discs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pbum5
  • Start date Start date Apr 18, 2005
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 18, 2005
#1
  • Apr 18, 2005
  • #1
Hey All,
I am wondering what Brake Master Cylinder would work best for my set-up? I will be swapping to Manual 4- wheel disc setup from my 4- Manual drums. I have a 1967.
In the front I am going with 68/69 Mustang discs w/upgrades (Semi-Metallic pads and slotted rotors). In the back I will be using SSBC rear disc set-up. What MC would work best and be a direct bolt in? I am guessing that The Wildwood adjustable proportioning valve is the way to go for a prop valve? Any tips or suggestions for this would be appreciated.

Thanks.
 

Rollinns

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
41
0
0
Missouri
Apr 19, 2005
#2
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #2
I'm interested in this too, as I will be doing the same only with crown vic rear discs instead. Some people are using a 98 Ranger MC with a 1 1/16 bore. I like the idea of having the clear reservoir on top so I don't have to remove the cap to check the fluid. Southern Rods has a new 1" bore MC for $50 that I'm considering but it is cast iron with the stamped steel cover.

The adjustable prop. is the way to go for the rear, don't forget the 2lb. residual valves.

I just checked and Rangers used 1 1/16 bore from 1995 to at least 2000 but the part number changed in 98.
 

skywalker

Member
Dec 22, 2003
733
0
16
Pensacola, FL
Apr 19, 2005
#3
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #3
I use a wilwood aluminum master cylinder for mine.
 
A

andrewVA

New Member
Oct 13, 2004
20
0
1
Apr 19, 2005
#4
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #4
You can also use an 84-86 SVO MC. Thats what I have to put in, but I haven't gotten to that stage of the project yet.
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 19, 2005
#5
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #5
Rollinns said:
I'm interested in this too, as I will be doing the same only with crown vic rear discs instead. Some people are using a 98 Ranger MC with a 1 1/16 bore. I like the idea of having the clear reservoir on top so I don't have to remove the cap to check the fluid. Southern Rods has a new 1" bore MC for $50 that I'm considering but it is cast iron with the stamped steel cover.

The adjustable prop. is the way to go for the rear, don't forget the 2lb. residual valves.

I just checked and Rangers used 1 1/16 bore from 1995 to at least 2000 but the part number changed in 98.[/QUO

Are all the MC's you mention a direct bolt up to a 67 Stang?
Click to expand...
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 19, 2005
#6
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #6
skywalker said:
I use a wilwood aluminum master cylinder for mine.
Click to expand...

Are you also using residual valves with your 4 disc setup?
 

BobV

20+ Year Stangneter
May 18, 2003
474
0
16
Leavenworth, KS
Apr 19, 2005
#7
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #7
I'm using the 84-86 Mustang SVO master. Seems to work very well with my Wilwood/Versailles combination. I had previously used the 70's Ford 3/4T truck master cylinder (HUGE 1-1/4" bore), but switched to the SVO as it uses a slightly smaller 1-1/8" bore and is made from aluminum. I think I paid <$30.
 

68rustang

Active Member
Jan 17, 2003
1,537
0
36
Cleveland, OH
Apr 19, 2005
#8
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #8
Where do the residual valves go and what is their purpose?
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 19, 2005
#9
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #9
BobV said:
I'm using the 84-86 Mustang SVO master. Seems to work very well with my Wilwood/Versailles combination. I had previously used the 70's Ford 3/4T truck master cylinder (HUGE 1-1/4" bore), but switched to the SVO as it uses a slightly smaller 1-1/8" bore and is made from aluminum. I think I paid <$30.
Click to expand...

Hey Bob,
Was that SVO MC a direct bolt in?
Did you buy it at a local parts store?

Is this the part?

http://www.partsamerica.com/ProductDetail.aspx?mfrcode=BEN&mfrpartnumber=R11897&parttype=230&ptset=A
 

BobV

20+ Year Stangneter
May 18, 2003
474
0
16
Leavenworth, KS
Apr 19, 2005
#10
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #10
Yep, that's it. I remember the "1897" part number. That part number is for both the aluminum & cast iron version - same part #, just the iron one was used on Lincolns. I had the local NAPA warehouse check their stock - they had 7 on hand - 2 were aluminum, and 5 were iron...

It bolts right up. I used the original 65 pushrod.
You DO need to fabricate the hard lines (no surprise there), as this M/C has outlets on the engine side. There was also a brass reducer fitting needed. I just bought a couple lengths of pre-flared tubing & bent to shape.
The front bowl connects to the Wilwood APV, then to the rear brakes, while the rear bowl connects to the original 65 distribution block, with the port formerly used by the rear line capped off.

 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 19, 2005
#11
  • Apr 19, 2005
  • #11
BobV said:
Yep, that's it. I remember the "1897" part number. That part number is for both the aluminum & cast iron version - same part #, just the iron one was used on Lincolns. I had the local NAPA warehouse check their stock - they had 7 on hand - 2 were aluminum, and 5 were iron...

It bolts right up. I used the original 65 pushrod.
You DO need to fabricate the hard lines (no surprise there), as this M/C has outlets on the engine side. There was also a brass reducer fitting needed. I just bought a couple lengths of pre-flared tubing & bent to shape.
The front bowl connects to the Wilwood APV, then to the rear brakes, while the rear bowl connects to the original 65 distribution block, with the port formerly used by the rear line capped off.
Click to expand...

That’s a clean engine compartment!!
When you get a chance can you take close up of the MC and how you plumed it. I just want to have a reference when I start on mine. I am assuming that the Aluminum MC is the way to go and not the iron one? Are you using a residual valve? Looks like you have a manual brake setup. So will I.
 
T

tomstir

Founding Member
Jun 28, 2000
342
0
0
San Jose
Apr 20, 2005
#12
  • Apr 20, 2005
  • #12
I think that part number 1897 is for power brakes....It doesn't look like Bobv has power brakes and Pbum5 is looking for manual...I am going to do the same 4wheel discs (manual) and there is a choice between 1 1/8 and 21mm bore....does anyone know which would be better for 4wheel manual discs..or would there not be any difference?

I just looked at another site and they give 1897 as power and then another choice as 1897..but does not say power or not...now I'm even more confused....Bobv..how is the pedal feel? If the 1 1/8 felt better than the 1 1/4 would that mean the 21mm would be better yet?
Comments/opinions

thanks
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 20, 2005
#13
  • Apr 20, 2005
  • #13
Rollinns said:
I'm interested in this too, as I will be doing the same only with crown vic rear discs instead. Some people are using a 98 Ranger MC with a 1 1/16 bore. I like the idea of having the clear reservoir on top so I don't have to remove the cap to check the fluid. Southern Rods has a new 1" bore MC for $50 that I'm considering but it is cast iron with the stamped steel cover.

The adjustable prop. is the way to go for the rear, don't forget the 2lb. residual valves.

I just checked and Rangers used 1 1/16 bore from 1995 to at least 2000 but the part number changed in 98.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like the residual valve is only necessary if you MC is lower than your brakes.
 

corpse

Founding Member
Jan 23, 2001
2,562
0
0
chicago area
Apr 20, 2005
#14
  • Apr 20, 2005
  • #14
With my shorty headers, I don't have room for engine-side mounted brake lines.. So I'm thinking that the best bet will be to have my current master cylinder, the stock one, simply bored to the same 1 1/8" spec as the svo? Plus, it will simply be cheaper, but having 4 wilwood 4-piston calipers, I want to make sure it's done right the first time So is it ONLY the difference of bore size that makes these mc's different?
 

skywalker

Member
Dec 22, 2003
733
0
16
Pensacola, FL
Apr 21, 2005
#15
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #15
Pbum5 said:
Are you also using residual valves with your 4 disc setup?
Click to expand...
no.
 
S

samwe

Founding Member
Jun 18, 1999
985
0
16
Eagle River, Ak, USA
Apr 21, 2005
#16
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #16
I am using one from a Windstar. '96 I think?
The only modification was to accomdate the outlets being on the opposite side of the MC.
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 21, 2005
#17
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #17
thanks for the input guys.

How about telling us if that SVO M/C will work form NON-power brakes?

my parts will be in soon and I need to know if that MC will work without a power booster.
 

BobV

20+ Year Stangneter
May 18, 2003
474
0
16
Leavenworth, KS
Apr 21, 2005
#18
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #18
The master cylinder has no idea whether a booster or your brake pedal are pushing against it. In other words, it works JUST FINE. The only real difference between a manual & P/B master cylinder is that the manual normally has a pushrod included, and some models have a different depth on the plunger hole.

Bore size has to be a compromise. The smaller the bore, the less pedal effort will be required - HOWEVER - that equates to more travel, which can make the pedal seem spongy. Disc brakes require more fluid to actuate than drums, due to the large piston size. You can check google - there's a formula for calculating bore size and pressure required - you'll need to know pedal ratios, caliper sizes and all that jazz...

But in general most people prefer 1" to 1-1/8" piston size with 4WDB. The 21mm would be on the small side, unless you're running small bore calipers. Go too small, the pedal will be softer, go too large, and your leg won't generate enough pressure to use all the brake you have available. If you can't "lock the brakes" with a hard stomp, you're using too large of a bore. With the old 1.25" bore (huge!) MC, my 120lb wife was still able to drive the car just fine. I/we actually prefer the stiffer pedal - you really get a feel for how the car is stopping - the harder you push, the closer your face gets to the windshield!
 

Pbum5

Member
Oct 27, 2004
515
0
17
Minneapolis, MN
Apr 21, 2005
#19
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #19
BobV said:
The master cylinder has no idea whether a booster or your brake pedal are pushing against it. In other words, it works JUST FINE. The only real difference between a manual & P/B master cylinder is that the manual normally has a pushrod included, and some models have a different depth on the plunger hole.

Bore size has to be a compromise. The smaller the bore, the less pedal effort will be required - HOWEVER - that equates to more travel, which can make the pedal seem spongy. Disc brakes require more fluid to actuate than drums, due to the large piston size. You can check google - there's a formula for calculating bore size and pressure required - you'll need to know pedal ratios, caliper sizes and all that jazz...

But in general most people prefer 1" to 1-1/8" piston size with 4WDB. The 21mm would be on the small side, unless you're running small bore calipers. Go too small, the pedal will be softer, go too large, and your leg won't generate enough pressure to use all the brake you have available. If you can't "lock the brakes" with a hard stomp, you're using too large of a bore. With the old 1.25" bore (huge!) MC, my 120lb wife was still able to drive the car just fine. I/we actually prefer the stiffer pedal - you really get a feel for how the car is stopping - the harder you push, the closer your face gets to the windshield!
Click to expand...

That’s what I needed to know. Thanks for the explanation.
Do you have any close-up pics of your MC and prop valve. I just want a visual reference when I do mine.

Thanks.
 

BobV

20+ Year Stangneter
May 18, 2003
474
0
16
Leavenworth, KS
Apr 21, 2005
#20
  • Apr 21, 2005
  • #20
Only shot I have is the OLD master cylinder. Same concept though...
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
68 manual disc/drum master cylinder
  • Butchd88
  • May 27, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
58
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- May 27, 2026
Butchd88
B
O
1967 Manual Drum Brakes , replaced the master cylinder and the brake light switch but the brakes lights stay on.
  • OldNSloww
  • Jul 14, 2025
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
7
Views
335
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jul 16, 2025
horse sence
8
87 lx 4cyl to v8 project 4 lug disc conversion questions
  • 87lx428
  • Mar 24, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
489
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Mar 25, 2026
87lx428
8
Rear Disc and Rims Offsets
  • TripleYellow
  • Nov 11, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
19
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 9, 2026
TripleYellow
D
Brakes 1966 Mustang convertible 289, Auto - Disc brake conversion issues
  • DRGunn427
  • Feb 26, 2025
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
604
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 30, 2026
manicmechanic007
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?