• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

Brake Booster Losing Pressure with Engine Running

Grey owl

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
395
Update on the update. Resivoir canister is installed. Only real difference is hard peddle from the get go instead of progressive. It does stay very consistent at low idle, but I'm still nots totally impressed with the front discs. Honestly they feel like 4 wheel drums.

I've rebled everything, no issues with leaks or other known issues. Maybe this is just was a vacuum assisted system feel like holding back 35's, 4:88's, and probably only 120HP from that stock 302🤷‍♂️
You will like those discs in wet conditions or if you are towing. On my 74 with drums while towing a boat the brake fade was dangerous, going down a steep grade even without a boat the brake fade was a issue.
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
51,619
Long downhill was the last straw for my '71's front drum brakes. They'd never let me down before, but that was a real upholstery-pucker event.
Got home (trip to Death Valley) and went to a local junkyard where I picked up an entire front axle from an F150. Got the brakes and the tie-rod/draglink (to narrow to EB width) and never looked back.

Totally worth it.

Paul
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
I've dealt with a disc brake conversion on my Jeep and I have to say, the conversion to this Bronco has been a bit disappointing. The brakes to me just don't seem to be fully biting or engaging to where I'm comfortable sending the wife or kids out on their own in traffic or high speeds on the road. Something still feels off to me, but I can't pin it down.

I think my real issue is related to vacuum at low idle and was hoping the reservoir would solve that. I've heard of electric vacuum booster type set ups, but have not read the need for them anywhere on a stock 302. Like stated, something is still off here.

Considering ditching this vacuum system and just making the jump to hydro assist.
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
51,619
You may just have a defective/innefective booster. Would not be the first time.
Sounds like you have plenty of vacuum from the engine, and that's all it should take. How large is your master cylinder piston?
These smallish boosters don't want a really large piston. Maybe 1" is tops. Whereas a hydroboost system is good for 1.125" and even 1.250" masters. Some use even larger ones, but the "boost" from those is large.
The Bronco boosters from the factory were halfway decent. The aftermarket are less so. We go to some extra lengths to make sure ours are working up to spec, but that might still not be enough.
Without having to go back, what size tires are you running? Which brakes? Standard GM conversion? Maybe the pad material is not the best?
Someone has probably already mentioned pad material, but thought I'd bring it up again.

Frankly, the old Ford brake conversion on my '71 where I kept the stock master and did not use a booster, has more "power" and a better feel than my '68 with it's GM conversion with vacuum booster. It's good, and does not leave me feeling inadequate, but it's just not as good as my Ford setup with much smaller caliper pistons.
In theory and on paper, the GM setup should be better in every way than the F150/Bronco brakes.

Might just come down to a bad booster.
I think it was member 904Bronco here that had a bum booster so took a factory take-off down to the local rebuilder. If'n I'm not mistaken, he said that one worked better than most of the others he'd tried.
Maybe he can chime in on that and fill in the details. If that was him that is.

Paul
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
You may just have a defective/innefective booster. Would not be the first time.
Sounds like you have plenty of vacuum from the engine, and that's all it should take. How large is your master cylinder piston?
These smallish boosters don't want a really large piston. Maybe 1" is tops. Whereas a hydroboost system is good for 1.125" and even 1.250" masters. Some use even larger ones, but the "boost" from those is large.
The Bronco boosters from the factory were halfway decent. The aftermarket are less so. We go to some extra lengths to make sure ours are working up to spec, but that might still not be enough.
Without having to go back, what size tires are you running? Which brakes? Standard GM conversion? Maybe the pad material is not the best?
Someone has probably already mentioned pad material, but thought I'd bring it up again.
The entire system was purchased through WH. Deluxe front disc kit, booster, and master cylinder were purchased at separate times, but all standard sourced parts from them. I've never thought about the pads being bad...
Frankly, the old Ford brake conversion on my '71 where I kept the stock master and did not use a booster, has more "power" and a better feel than my '68 with it's GM conversion with vacuum booster. It's good, and does not leave me feeling inadequate, but it's just not as good as my Ford setup with much smaller caliper pistons.
In theory and on paper, the GM setup should be better in every way than the F150/Bronco brakes.

Might just come down to a bad booster.
I think it was member 904Bronco here that had a bum booster so took a factory take-off down to the local rebuilder. If'n I'm not mistaken, he said that one worked better than most of the others he'd tried.
Maybe he can chime in on that and fill in the details. If that was him that is.

Paul
Thanks Paul. Going to square away my little issues currently with the carb then get back after these brakes.
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
Back to focusing on these brakes. I'm wondering if I just swap out the proportioning valve considering the issues I had with it already. 🤷‍♂️

The MS is the heavy duty aluminum one from WH that is simply just 50/50 aluminum reservoir, so before I mess with the proportioning valve I plan to simply swap the brake lines from front to back on the MS between the MS and Proportioning valve. I'm curious if the fountain of fluid that appears out of the MS for the rear brakes which are pulling from the front reservoir will now be flowing from the front. reservoir

In other words, front reservoir feeds rear brakes currently. I was told reservoir selection makes no difference for this a particular reservoir but maybe the front does push more fluid. Or the flow of fluid is significantly restricted in the proportioning valve which in turn causes the fountain for the rear brakes and little to no difference for the front brakes.

Just spit balling this out loud here...
 
Last edited:

Grey owl

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
395
Back to focusing on these brakes. I'm wondering if I just swap out the proportioning valve considering the issues I had with it already. 🤷‍♂️

The MS is the heavy duty aluminum one from WH that is simply just 50/50 aluminum reservoir, so before I mess with the proportioning valve I plan to simply swap the brake lines from front to back on the MS between the MS and Proportioning valve. I'm curious if the fountain of fluid that appears out of the MS for the rear brakes which are pulling from the front reservoir will now be flowing from the front. reservoir

In other words, front reservoir feeds rear brakes currently. I was told reservoir selection makes no difference for this a particular reservoir but maybe the front does push more fluid. Or the flow of fluid is significantly restricted in the proportioning valve which in turn causes the fountain for the rear brakes and little to no difference for the front brakes.

Just spit balling this out loud here...
Are you locking the brake light switch on the PP valve before you bleed the brakes. Its easy to find yourself chasing brake problems , changing parts , moving lines around etc.
You need to follow all the steps including locking the brake switch valve. You can change the proportioning valve if you are concerned its the problem.
 

Attachments

  • 20250114_144331.jpg
    20250114_144331.jpg
    254 KB · Views: 96
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
Swapped lines at the master cylinder. Fountain still shoots out the front reservoir regardless of if it's feeding rear brakes or front brakes. Rear Reservoir has obvious movement, but no fountain of fluid. Test drive, no difference in braking.
 

Grey owl

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
395
Sure sounds like the valve in your PV needs to be reset. Thats odd if you have been using the tool to keep it centered while bleeding the brakes. For what ever reason these new PV seem way more sensitive to that valve movement when bleeding brakes.
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
Sure sounds like the valve in your PV needs to be reset. Thats odd if you have been using the tool to keep it centered while bleeding the brakes. For what ever reason these new PV seem way more sensitive to that valve movement when bleeding brakes.
All kinds of weird stuff with this set up. I was shocked to pull out the failed metering valve to see a blockage. That may have been the start of the issues. At any rate, new PV will be going in this week. I plan on doing a reverse bleed, then a standard bleed (out the calipers).

I'm still just real curious why there is only a fountain of fluid out the front reservoir on the MS and not the back. I noticed that as well when I did a reverse bleed on them before. I figured if it was specific to the PV I would see a difference after switching Front and Rear lines. Make me wonder if this whole time, aside from leaks, if I've been dealing with a faulty MS.

Pic added for reference:
Proportioning valve 4.jpeg
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
51,619
Since I've never had these kinds of issues myself, I've never noted whether or not the amount of "spout" when pushing/releasing the pedal was an indicator of a specific problem.
All I know is that on most of my tandem master cylinder equipped vehicles, both reservoirs never had the same amount of squirting fluid.
Sometimes there was very little in one, sometimes both had some, rarely both had nothing but a little mound build up. Just never noted issues when one spouted more up than the other.
Hopefully this is something that can be quantified though. Interested to hear what happens after the swap.

Paul
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
Short story is Brakes still SUCK!

But right out of the gate, after swapping out the Proportioning valve the Shooting Fountain out of the reservoir is gone. I did a reverse bleed on the brakes.... of course with the bleed screw stop thingy installed... @Grey owl ... then did a standard bleed with fluid shooting out each end of the brakes (yes the thingy tool was still in there). Removed the bleed thingy at the proportioning valve and went for a test drive. Brakes still suck. They will stop the Bronco, but I can tell you that my no power assist anything 1972 baja bug stops better than the Bronco.

It's kind of hard to explain, but when you press the brakes on a normal set up, the pressure seems kind of progressive. Meaning the harder you push, the harder it brakes. This one.... NOPE. Press it as hard as you want, no progression. I guess I will just have to take that into consideration anywhere I drive it if I'm keeping this system installed.
 

Grey owl

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
395
Thats not good. Is your vacuum source the carb or the intake, are you using a sturdy enough hose so that its not collapsing and its a dedicated line, What is your vacuum reading at idle. It should be in the 17 range. Is your MC plunger preload no more than 1/16 ". When i set that i slide the MC onto the plunger till it bottoms out, at that point adjust plunger till you have a 1/16 gap between MC and booster. Then tighten MC nuts tne 1/16 creates a preload. That is exactly how mine is set up and i have good brakes.

My cam is right on the edge so my over all engine vacuum is a little lower, so the pedal will be a little hard at times so i may eventually add a vacuum resivor.
 

mdainsd

Contributor
Full Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2025
Messages
263
Loc.
San Diego
Hmm. No one has mentioned the residual pressure check valves in the M/C. I forget now whether it is the discs or the drums that use them, I want to say that they are used with the drum brakes and the discs do not use them. Drums have springs bringing the shoes back off of the drums. If the shoes are out of adjustment and there are no check valves in the M/C you will get low pedal, as you have to use u pedal travel just getting the shoes back out to the drums. Discs don't use any springs when the brakes are released, they depend upon a tiny wobble in the discs that push the pistons ever so slightly back. Are they installed in your M/C and which ports have them? Somewhere in this thread you mentioned a 3/16 to 1/4" gap between the pads and the rotors? That is entirely wrong.

Side bar, My U14 has discs up front and drums in back and NO booster. works great. Great modulation and if really needed I can lock them up.
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
51,619
Hmm. No one has mentioned the residual pressure check valves in the M/C. I forget now whether it is the discs or the drums that use them, I want to say that they are used with the drum brakes and the discs do not use them.
Glad you brought it up! Essentially correct. At least "officially" a drum brake setup uses a 10psi rpv, while a disc brake setup uses a 2psi rpv.
But that's only if you choose to use them, or if you actually need them.
They had two basic important functions back in the day.
1. Was to keep fluid pressure against the pistons in the wheel cylinders, to better keep the seals from leaking and from letting the pistons back off even further than the shoe anchor pins would normally allow.
2. Was to keep brake fluid from migrating "down" from the wheels to the older, VERY LOW mounted master cylinders. Back when you checked and filled them by a panel in the floorboards!
Hasn't been a thing for over 60 years though, I'd venture to guess.
Most modern replacement masters (and probably all aftermarket performance types?) don't even have them as part of the master anymore. Not needed with high-mounted masters which are the norm, and not needed with most wheel cylinders coming with internal springs to do the same thing.
But it pays to know if you have springs or not, as it might effect how you build the rest of the system.
When we do a disc brake swap on an older master though, where they were more often present, we remove the one from the disc brake circuit.
Drums have springs bringing the shoes back off of the drums. If the shoes are out of adjustment and there are no check valves in the M/C you will get low pedal, as you have to use u pedal travel just getting the shoes back out to the drums.
True, but only for a short time. Eventually, if not immediately, the pressure of the springs is WAY more than enough to overcome any residual pressure check valve. So your drum brakes (assuming they're working correctly and are of the design we're all more familiar with) will ALWAYS return to their anchor points. So adjustment is critical whether you have a valve or not.
So yes, the low pedal can definitely come from the drums if they're out of adjustment. Unfortunately, at least in my experience, the auto-adjuster mechanisms are rarely super efficient. Even when they're working, they don't always keep up with lining wear.
Discs don't use any springs when the brakes are released, they depend upon a tiny wobble in the discs that push the pistons ever so slightly back.
And some (maybe all of them nowadays?) rely on the design of the caliper's piston seal to just barely apply some inward/backward pressure to act as a pull-off mechanism. So even without that slight wobble, most disc pads will be pulled ever so slightly off to keep from dragging.
Are they installed in your M/C and which ports have them? Somewhere in this thread you mentioned a 3/16 to 1/4" gap between the pads and the rotors? That is entirely wrong.
I didn't catch that. But yes, that's entirely too much gap for just about any part of a brake system.
Side bar, My U14 has discs up front and drums in back and NO booster. works great. Great modulation and if really needed I can lock them up.
Same here with my '71. No booster, and original (actually the first replacement) master cylinder. Replaced the master in about '81 or so maybe? It definitely had the rpv's in the ports. You could feel them with a poker thingy against the rubber and spring pressure.
I purposely drove it around the first week of commuting with the RPV still installed just to see if it would lock up the brakes. It did not, and drove just fine. But I still took it out because it was the correct thing to do and I didn't want to have any trouble on a long trip where the brakes might have heated up more.

Paul
 

El Kabong

Contributor
Driving stuff Henry built
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,559
An old shade tree test it to apply the parking brake, then see what the pedal feels like with the engine running. If the pedal improves with the e-brake on, there is something wrong in the rear drum brakes.
 
Last edited:

Grey owl

Contributor
Sr. Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2024
Messages
395
Glad you brought it up! Essentially correct. At least "officially" a drum brake setup uses a 10psi rpv, while a disc brake setup uses a 2psi rpv.
But that's only if you choose to use them, or if you actually need them.
They had two basic important functions back in the day.
1. Was to keep fluid pressure against the pistons in the wheel cylinders, to better keep the seals from leaking and from letting the pistons back off even further than the shoe anchor pins would normally allow.
2. Was to keep brake fluid from migrating "down" from the wheels to the older, VERY LOW mounted master cylinders. Back when you checked and filled them by a panel in the floorboards!
Hasn't been a thing for over 60 years though, I'd venture to guess.
Most modern replacement masters (and probably all aftermarket performance types?) don't even have them as part of the master anymore. Not needed with high-mounted masters which are the norm, and not needed with most wheel cylinders coming with internal springs to do the same thing.
But it pays to know if you have springs or not, as it might effect how you build the rest of the system.
When we do a disc brake swap on an older master though, where they were more often present, we remove the one from the disc brake circuit.

True, but only for a short time. Eventually, if not immediately, the pressure of the springs is WAY more than enough to overcome any residual pressure check valve. So your drum brakes (assuming they're working correctly and are of the design we're all more familiar with) will ALWAYS return to their anchor points. So adjustment is critical whether you have a valve or not.
So yes, the low pedal can definitely come from the drums if they're out of adjustment. Unfortunately, at least in my experience, the auto-adjuster mechanisms are rarely super efficient. Even when they're working, they don't always keep up with lining wear.

And some (maybe all of them nowadays?) rely on the design of the caliper's piston seal to just barely apply some inward/backward pressure to act as a pull-off mechanism. So even without that slight wobble, most disc pads will be pulled ever so slightly off to keep from dragging.

I didn't catch that. But yes, that's entirely too much gap for just about any part of a brake system.

Same here with my '71. No booster, and original (actually the first replacement) master cylinder. Replaced the master in about '81 or so maybe? It definitely had the rpv's in the ports. You could feel them with a poker thingy against the rubber and spring pressure.
I purposely drove it around the first week of commuting with the RPV still installed just to see if it would lock up the brakes. It did not, and drove just fine. But I still took it out because it was the correct thing to do and I didn't want to have any trouble on a long trip where the brakes might have heated up more.

Paul
I believe those valves are used inline after the PV, and only in the rear brake line. I am not so sure residual pressure would be good for disc brakes.
 
OP
OP
JeepGuy

JeepGuy

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,521
Update on this issue.

@raleigh_bronco I ended up getting a vacuum reservoir from Summit. Between that and having a good mechanic friend do a little tuning of this thing the brakes work very well. It's been a few weeks of good driving and I don't recall exactly what the issue was with the brake system, but he did mention I had one of the lines on the vacuum set up on the wrong port. Basically the check valves somewhere between the port on the engine, through the reservoir, then to the booster were fighting against each other. I'm the only one who had worked on this prior so I definitely have to take the blame, but am certain I followed whatever routing instructions came with the reservoir. I'm just glad they work now. Had it out in the desert last week crawling up and down all kinds of stuff without a brake issue or worry.
 
Last edited:
Top