Yes that's how I see it. I think Graham and I are getting lost in our
different ways of describing the limiters function. Anyway I have tested my
brakes and everything appears to be working.
Years ago I new a guy who raced Suds and would put rubber grommets on the
bar to raise the piston in the limiter and increase the rear braking effort
as he thought the standard settings (that is with the car sitting on its
wheels with no extra load )were to conservative. This was of course
compounded by lightening the car for racing. He would make adjustments until
he could lock up the rear brakes and then back it off a bit. It will be
interesting to fit a manually adjustable limiter and carry out some tests.
Martin

----- Original Message -----
From: "steven_allenby" <steveallenby@...>
To: <sprintformation@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 9:05 AM
Subject: [sprintformation] Re: Stuck rear brake limiter


>
> Hi, sadly it has now been six years since I had to say goodbye to
> my '82 Cloverleaf so I cannot speak specifically about there
> operation on the Sud but, generally, my understanding of load-sensing
> brake limiting valves:
>
> With the rear of a vehicle unloaded - thus no actuation of the lever
> arm of the valve - the valve will be providing its maximum limiting,
> i.e. minimal braking, to avoid locking the lightly loaded rear wheels
> before the more heavily loaded fronts.
>
> As the vehicle is loaded, and the suspension compresses, the lever
> arm of the limiting valve is actuated resulting in a reduction of the
> limiting effect of the valve and thus allowing increased rear wheel
> braking.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> --- In sprintformation@yahoogroups.com, Graham&Joan Hilder
> <graham.joan@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hello again Martin,
> >
> > When you say, "I therefore assumed it could only seize in the off
> position
> > if the rear of the car was left up on axel stands with the rear axle
> > hanging", you're exactly right, which is why they never do seize in
> that
> > state, but always in an on or partly-on state, in which you have
> full or
> > nearly full braking available at the back. I just had a quick look
> under one
> > of our Suds, and found that, with the car empty and at rest, the
> > valve-actuating lever was not pressing against the valve at all,
> suggesting
> > that the valve was completely relaxed and providing full rear
> braking, i.e.
> > that any limiting would not start until the rear suspension started
> to rise
> > above its static and empty level. I guess the rear brake pistons
> are of
> > such small diam that no limiting is needed until this happens.
> >
> > And when you say, "with our Citroen GS`s ...We used to load up the
> boots for
> > the MOT to make sure the rear callipers were doing some work",
> well, if my
> > observations under my Sud tonight were right, that wouldn't help in
> a Sud,
> > as even with my car empty the valve was already supplying no
> limiting, i.e.
> > max braking. It'd be interesting to make some proper tests with
> jacking up
> > and loading down the suspension and observing how the valve
> actuating lever
> > reacts.
> >
> > Best rgds,
> > Graham in NZ
> >
> > >>>>>>>
> > Martin wrote...
> > I always assumed the valve was progressive. That is, when the car
> was fully
> > laden with rear passengers and a full boot it was 'off ' and when
> braking
> > very hard unladen was 'on' to prevent rear lock up. So under light
> braking
> > with no extra load it was about half on (or half off) and this was
> why the
> > rear disks rust, as most of the time there is no extra weight on
> the rear
> > and so rear braking effort is always partly restricted. I therefore
> assumed
> > it could only seize in the off position if the rear of the car was
> left up
> > on axel stands with the rear axel hanging...
> > ...with our Citroen GS`s...We used to load up the boots for the MOT
> to make
> > sure the rear callipers were doing some work.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sprintformation - The Number 1 Alfa Romeo Boxer Fanzine
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>