63-65 Brake reaction rod question

[Guest duksters]

Does anyone have a photo handy of a brake reaction rod(strut rod) (Frame side) to post? My 63 service manual has to be wrong. It's telling me that the 1st washer Installed on the rod needs to be dish towards the rear. Misprint?

[Jim Cannon]

I installed mine with the dished side toward the nut.

I read the shop manual just now and agree with you that they say to put the dished side away from the nut.

I really don't think it matters.

[George Buick Riviera]

I am going to install it as A on the attached picture - that makes more sense to me ...

 

Edited March 1, 2017 by buick-riviera.pl
problems with picture (see edit history)

[KongaMan]

I'd go with B.

[George Buick Riviera]

27 minutes ago, KongaMan said:

I'd go with B.

Have you seen the bushing that contacts the washer ? I mean the bushing that is at the top of the picture - from CARS.

[KongaMan]

As I read the 64 manual, neither A nor B is correct: "Install washer with larger diameter on brake reaction rod first, with concave side away from nut. Install rod thru bushing in frame bracket.  Install washer with smaller diameter and castellated nut."

 

It looks like you've got the smaller washer on first.

 

So, I would install the larger washer as in B, then the smaller washer as in A.

[RivNut]

I just looked at the brake reaction rod on my 64.  There's a cupped washer that goes on the end between the castle nut and outside bushing.  

 

I found a series of pictures that show the assembly of the bushings on V8TVs Kevin's 1970 Riviera. Google 'V8TV Riviera' and find the article where Kevin modifies some Mustang bushings to work on his Riviera.  It will give you an idea as to the configuration of the bearings on the rod.

 

Basically the taper on the inner bushing goes through the frame and seats into the open end of the other bushing.  The tapered end of the outer bushing fits into the cupped washer followed by the castle nut.

 

Ed

Edited March 1, 2017 by RivNut (see edit history)

[KongaMan]

It sounds like you and I are on the same page with regard to washer order and orientation.  So let's complicate things even further...

 

If you're switching to radial tires, you'll want to get as much positive caster as you can.  It's been reported that you can shave down the reaction rod bushings a bit to pull the lower control arm a little further forward.  This will give you more caster than you can get simply by adjusting the shims on the upper control arm.  You wouldn't need to move it far; ¼" would give you 1-1.5° of positive caster.  You don't want to go too far, either, lest the lower control arm bind.

[George Buick Riviera]

20 hours ago, KongaMan said:

As I read the 64 manual, neither A nor B is correct: "Install washer with larger diameter on brake reaction rod first, with concave side away from nut. Install rod thru bushing in frame bracket.  Install washer with smaller diameter and castellated nut."

It looks like you've got the smaller washer on first.

So, I would install the larger washer as in B, then the smaller washer as in A.

 

Question is "which diameter": washer or hole in the washer ?.

Please check the picture - there is only one possibility of the order of the washers and that is limited by the diameter of the hole in the washer.

Smaller washer has bigger hole, while bigger washer has smaller hole. Therefore bigger washer can not go as first, as it is fitting only the threaded part of the rod.

My only question is regarding dished side of the smaller washer - I think I will install it dished side to the bushing (rubber) - like you wrote "concave side away from nut".

Man - how I was not able to find that sentence in the manual ? I will check again - thank you :-)

[RivNut]

There should be a taper on one end of the inner bushing (smaller hole) that extends through the frame and fits into the outer bushing (larger hole).  There's a male / female relationship going on here between the two bushings.  The hole in the frame is probably larger than the rod that goes through it, isn't it?  Some room for that "male" bushing to pass through and fit into the "female" bushing.  Just like the new bushings are shown aligned in post #3..

[RivNut]

HEY!

 

Has anyone else noticed that the posts are no longer numbered?  I had to count for this last one, sure glad it wasn't a bigger thread of I'd had to have taken off my shoes.  

 

Ed

[George Buick Riviera]

I will look at this as well, thanks for the tip Ed !

My other problem is that I was not disassembling the car by myself, so I can not say how it was....

[George Buick Riviera]

1 minute ago, RivNut said:

HEY!

Has anyone else noticed that the posts are no longer numbered?  I had to count for this last one, sure glad it wasn't a bigger thread of I'd had to have taken off my shoes.

Ed

You are right - I saw it as well - had to count and find #3...

Ed, maybe you can send this information to the forum administration ? Last days there was some big update / movement to the new server, so there is a chance they can bring the # back ?

[KongaMan]

22 hours ago, RivNut said:

I found a series of pictures that show the assembly of the bushings on V8TVs Kevin's 1970 Riviera. Google 'V8TV Riviera' and find the article where Kevin modifies some Mustang bushings to work on his Riviera.  It will give you an idea as to the configuration of the bearings on the rod.

 

Here's that post with the pictures: http://v8tvshow.com/V8TV_2/index.php/en/2014-06-04-18-58-54/2015-03-25-22-59-39/232-1970-buick-riviera-thread-and-now-for-something-completely-different?start=72#2485.

[George Buick Riviera]

Yes, I have seen it as well, even before I decided to post the question here at AACA. But did you noticed the title for that V8TV article ? 1970 Riviera ... maybe there it is different solution.

Edited March 2, 2017 by buick-riviera.pl (see edit history)

[1965rivgs]

To add a little confusion to this thread....the aftermarket bushings which I most often see and have installed are marketed by Moog. They are different from the bushing kit pictured in that they do not mate as male/female like those pictured.The Moog kit specifically has the washers marked so the concave side of the washer is installed AWAY from the bushing. I pined over this the first time I did this job, back in the late `70`s/early `80`s, but followed the installation guidelines with no ill effects.

Also, I have never seen the bushings pictured in an OEM package as I have the Mood bushings referenced above. Where did the pictured bushings originate? Originally a Mopar application?

  Tom

[George Buick Riviera]

The pictured bushings in post #3 (lets say type 1) are from CARS. http://www.oldbuickparts.com/cart/brake-reaction-rod-kit-1963-68-buick-p-25772.html

 

I have seen also another type (lets say type 2) of bushing available for Riviera 65: http://www.oldbuickparts.com/cart/brake-reaction-rod-kit-1961-62-buick-p-23899.html.

Moreover, I have seen both type 1 and type 2 of the bushings in the different suspension drawings (different books) for Riv 65.

Is the type 2 what you used, Tom ?

[jsgun]

On Fords the washer domes away from the bushing too. I think it's to allow room for the rod to swivel. It's a common mistake to put them on backwards, and causes the bushing to fall apart from the additional pressure put on it. I suspect it's the same way on the Buick.

[1965rivgs]

15 hours ago, buick-riviera.pl said:

The pictured bushings in post #3 (lets say type 1) are from CARS. http://www.oldbuickparts.com/cart/brake-reaction-rod-kit-1963-68-buick-p-25772.html

 

I have seen also another type (lets say type 2) of bushing available for Riviera 65: http://www.oldbuickparts.com/cart/brake-reaction-rod-kit-1961-62-buick-p-23899.html.

Moreover, I have seen both type 1 and type 2 of the bushings in the different suspension drawings (different books) for Riv 65.

Is the type 2 what you used, Tom ?

Hi George,

  The bushings you describe as type 2 are the same as the ORIGINAL bushings. As the Buick service parts evolved thru the years the bushings changed dramatically. The later bushings are much more heavy duty than their predecessors. I probably have 3 or 4 different types which are NOS.

  I dont have a pic but I`m sure, if you do a search on Rock Auto you can obtain a pic of the currently available bushings. There are other bushings out there but Moog has been marketing the currently available type since I started working on the cars which was in the late `70`s.

  Tom

PS If you look at the bushings you have labeled type 1 and 2 you will see the type 2, which is the original bushing style, is much cheaper in price. The reason is because the upgraded bushing style, type 1, is much sturdier. But if one is a stickler for original cosmetics the choice is obvious

[anestech*]

Are these tapered style ones the ones that can be cut down to pull the arms forward for more caster?  How much should be cut?  I’m assuming from the small end of the cone shaped one, which would be mounted on the “rear” side so that the LCA would be pulled to the front of the car.  Am I thinking about this correctly?

[KongaMan]

55 minutes ago, anestech* said:

Are these tapered style ones the ones that can be cut down to pull the arms forward for more caster?  How much should be cut?  I’m assuming from the small end of the cone shaped one, which would be mounted on the “rear” side so that the LCA would be pulled to the front of the car.  Am I thinking about this correctly?

Far better to adjust the geometry of the linkage than to cut down the bushings.  Rather then centering the arm on the shaft per the shop manual, give it an extra couple of spins so it's closer to the rear.  That will give you the extra caster you're after without pulling the LCA off-center and cocking the bushing.  The calculations for this are posted elsewhere on this site.  It works out that putting the UCA one turn off-center gives you something like .5" of positive caster.  As a practical matter, you can only move the arm 4-5 turns forwards or backwards on the shaft.

 

Of course, if you want the cheap and easy "fix", just tighten the reaction rod nuts a couple of extra turns.  That will pull the LCA forward as well.  The potential issue is that if you pull the LCA too far forward, you risk binding and/or distorting the bushing, as it's no longer rotating squarely about the bolt.  That's why it's better to move the UCA rearwards.

 

If you think about it, this whole procedure is dicey to begin with.  Caster is determined by the relationship between the UCA and the LCA.  The position of the UCA is determined by its location on the shaft.  As noted above, that can be adjusted fairly precisely.  The position of the LCA is determined to a significant degree by the effective length of the reaction road (i.e. how far down the nut is tightened).  The FSM says to set that length by tightening that nut to a particular torque.  The problem there is that the relationship between the torque and the resulting length is entirely dependent on the bushings, with respect to both size and compressibility.  If the new bushings are slightly longer or made of a harder compound than the originals, the specified torque setting won't pull the LCA as far forward.  Conversely, if they're shorter or softer, the arm will be pulled further forward.    It can be an iterative process.  If your car is up on the rack and you can't get the caster you're after or you need an excessive number of shims, you may benefit from doing a little readjustment of those nuts.

Edited December 11, 2019 by KongaMan (see edit history)

[anestech*]

Ok, so for 100% clarity, i could cut where I’m pointing, or just over-tighten a bit.  Currently I have 2 puck style bushings with a center section on each, but the new one shown is the superseded one, correct?