Hector.Brocklebank
|
 posted on 23/5/12 at 08:18 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitestu
Nobody is addressing the main issue and sole purpose of existence of handbrakes.
Can you do handbrake turns with them?
Some people can never handle the truth and always try to shoot the messenger instead of taking an honest look in the mirror (its always easier to
blame another than to face reality), but secretly they wish they could grow a pair and be the messenger !!!
|
|
|
|
|
Hector.Brocklebank
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitestu
Nobody is addressing the main issue and sole purpose of existence of handbrakes.
Can you do handbrake turns with them?
Some people can never handle the truth and always try to shoot the messenger instead of taking an honest look in the mirror (its always easier to
blame another than to face reality), but secretly they wish they could grow a pair and be the messenger !!!
|
|
|
Hector.Brocklebank
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitestu
Nobody is addressing the main issue and sole purpose of existence of handbrakes.
Can you do handbrake turns with them?
Some people can never handle the truth and always try to shoot the messenger instead of taking an honest look in the mirror (its always easier to
blame another than to face reality), but secretly they wish they could grow a pair and be the messenger !!!
|
|
|
Hector.Brocklebank
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitestu
Nobody is addressing the main issue and sole purpose of existence of handbrakes.
Can you do handbrake turns with them?
Some people can never handle the truth and always try to shoot the messenger instead of taking an honest look in the mirror (its always easier to
blame another than to face reality), but secretly they wish they could grow a pair and be the messenger !!!
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:27 PM |
|
|
I don't get all the negative views here. If you have packaging issues then, just like the OEMs, an electric solution makes a lot of sense. If
you don't, stick with the lever like the majority of mass produced cars still do. The info given is very useful and I can assure that what VOSA
are looking for is a far cry from the level of failsafes that type approval requires.
The comments above are all the same kind of stuff that would have been said when hydraulic brakes started to take over from rod linkages; discs
superceded drums; electric starter motors were introduced; etc etc. Fuel injection is another example: yes, when it goes wrong it can be expensive and
potentially difficult to diagnose, but most modern cars go their entire lives without missing a single beat. I'm running a 1994 Volvo engine on
its original ECU and sensors in the MK; 18 years old and it has never needed tuning or adjusting in any way, just oil and filters periodically.
I digress a little, but do we want to go back to 3000 mile services involving valve adjustment, brake shoe adjustment and points / spark plug gapping
amongst countless other items? Yes, the 500+ quid bill if / when something goes wrong is hard to swallow, but you've saved that many times over
in the life of the car compared to the maintenance costs of the old technology that seems so loved by some! I admit this logic is not really relevant
in the EPB debate, but the principle of rejecting new technology rather than learning about it holds true.
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:27 PM |
|
|
I don't get all the negative views here. If you have packaging issues then, just like the OEMs, an electric solution makes a lot of sense. If
you don't, stick with the lever like the majority of mass produced cars still do. The info given is very useful and I can assure that what VOSA
are looking for is a far cry from the level of failsafes that type approval requires.
The comments above are all the same kind of stuff that would have been said when hydraulic brakes started to take over from rod linkages; discs
superceded drums; electric starter motors were introduced; etc etc. Fuel injection is another example: yes, when it goes wrong it can be expensive and
potentially difficult to diagnose, but most modern cars go their entire lives without missing a single beat. I'm running a 1994 Volvo engine on
its original ECU and sensors in the MK; 18 years old and it has never needed tuning or adjusting in any way, just oil and filters periodically.
I digress a little, but do we want to go back to 3000 mile services involving valve adjustment, brake shoe adjustment and points / spark plug gapping
amongst countless other items? Yes, the 500+ quid bill if / when something goes wrong is hard to swallow, but you've saved that many times over
in the life of the car compared to the maintenance costs of the old technology that seems so loved by some! I admit this logic is not really relevant
in the EPB debate, but the principle of rejecting new technology rather than learning about it holds true.
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:28 PM |
|
|
I don't get all the negative views here. If you have packaging issues then, just like the OEMs, an electric solution makes a lot of sense. If
you don't, stick with the lever like the majority of mass produced cars still do. The info given is very useful and I can assure that what VOSA
are looking for is a far cry from the level of failsafes that type approval requires.
The comments above are all the same kind of stuff that would have been said when hydraulic brakes started to take over from rod linkages; discs
superceded drums; electric starter motors were introduced; etc etc. Fuel injection is another example: yes, when it goes wrong it can be expensive and
potentially difficult to diagnose, but most modern cars go their entire lives without missing a single beat. I'm running a 1994 Volvo engine on
its original ECU and sensors in the MK; 18 years old and it has never needed tuning or adjusting in any way, just oil and filters periodically.
I digress a little, but do we want to go back to 3000 mile services involving valve adjustment, brake shoe adjustment and points / spark plug gapping
amongst countless other items? Yes, the 500+ quid bill if / when something goes wrong is hard to swallow, but you've saved that many times over
in the life of the car compared to the maintenance costs of the old technology that seems so loved by some! I admit this logic is not really relevant
in the EPB debate, but the principle of rejecting new technology rather than learning about it holds true.
|
|
|
mad4x4
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:43 PM |
|
|
Why not have a linear actuator like the one above pressing on the arm of a master cylinder to move a hydraulic caliper ...
Scot's do it better in Kilts.
MK INDY's Don't Self Centre Regardless of MK Setting !
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mad4x4
Why not have a linear actuator like the one above pressing on the arm of a master cylinder to move a hydraulic caliper ...
Has to be purely mechanical... no hydraulics allowed.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mad4x4
Why not have a linear actuator like the one above pressing on the arm of a master cylinder to move a hydraulic caliper ...
Because the emergency brake has to be mechanical, hydraulic handbrakes aren't legal. (Might be legal for an MSVA'ed trike though)
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 08:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by iank
quote:
Originally posted by mad4x4
Why not have a linear actuator like the one above pressing on the arm of a master cylinder to move a hydraulic caliper ...
... (Might be legal for an MSVA'ed trike though)
Fraid not. 
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 09:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JeffHs
Toyota uses electric park brake and everyone knows Toyotas don't break down!!!!
It would be an understatement Toyotas not near as bullet proof as they were 10 years ago, and that is nothing to do with the cruise control
nonsense.
[I] What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 23/5/12 at 09:44 PM |
|
|
Ford use the simplest system an electrically driven screw jack pulls on the cable. To meet regulations the jack is designed with worm drive so
it "overhauls" ie internal friction id desined to be high so friction holds it on and it has to be electrically driven
backwards to release tension from the cable
Still it is absolutely pointless extra complication.
[I] What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
hughpinder
|
| posted on 24/5/12 at 07:43 AM |
|
|
Oh 'eck
I quite surprised how negative this threads gone, (although my own post earlier reads more negatively than I thoght when I typed it). I can see the
reason for fitting one if the packaging works, and can imagine it is pretty reliable if you take away the 'auto' gubbings, and have a
on/off switch (preferably with some decent cover to stop accidental activation!). I can't imagine using one myself for reasons mentioned before,
and because it seems like a load of extra efforst/cost (unless you stripped the donor and had al the bits anyway), but then I'm building a self
designed midi as my first 'kit', and no one would recommend that either. So thanks for posting the info and drawing, and best of luck - I
will be interested to hear how you get on with it. Remember the reason for doing something a particular way on one of these cars doesn't have to
be any more that 'because I fancy it that way...'
Regards
Hugh
|
|
|
mcerd1
|
| posted on 24/5/12 at 07:49 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Still it is absolutely pointless extra complication.
not for the production line - its easier to plug them into the loom at the back than it is to run the cable the length of the car
just like its easier to fit a FWD engine with all the drivetrain on one subframe than it is too fit a front and rear subframe and join them with a
propshaft or its easier to build a monocoque than a separate chassis car
All modern cars are designed to be easy to build on the production line, any maintenance access / repairability is a bit of an afterthought these days
Not saying its always a bad thing, but the reason cars are made like this is always down to cost
but like coyoteboy and Hugh have both said, its your own choice and this forum is filled with people doing all kinds of weird and wonderful
"..because I like it..." projects 
(ps - feel free to take the wee out of me for sticking with a pinto engine becuase I like it  )
[Edited on 24/5/2012 by mcerd1]
-
|
|
|
coyoteboy
|
| posted on 24/5/12 at 10:25 AM |
|
|
hughpinder - cheers for the slightly more positive note!
britishtrident - I don't see it as much, if any, extra complication as there's nothing complicated about it, but each to his own.
I fully recognise the tiny increase in unsprung mass (which is avoided by the mono-point system but which really is more of a complexity issue as
you're keeping half of the original components AND adding electronics. I don't recognise the heat problem, nor the control problem.
You've swapped a lever and ratchet and two cables for two motors, two gears and two locking pins. Sure electric motors fail, but primarily with
use - not going to be seen much on a kit. The locking pins are the likely failure point IMO, they'll be spring assisted and disengaged
electronically. Sliding joint in a thermally fluctuating location is probably the point that causes most failures on these and I think that's
borne out by evidence - people claiming they either release when not expected (spring not pushed it home properly) or don't release (pin jammed
or wire broken maybe). Neither of these is catastrophic and a quick strip and diag would solve the issue but in dealership/OEM situations it's
just not financially viable - quicker to replace the whole caliper.
I guess my position is "I don't see electronics as bad or a complication" which is a personal point of view based on my experience
and work. It seems I've struck a nerve here, plenty of folk seem almost agressively against the idea. Maybe it's contrary to the locost
principles the site tends to follow, but I don't think so. Unless you think you need to run the OEM electronics to get it to work, but I
don't.
Strange to see plenty of folk build, modify and tune their own megasquirts (ECU), fit tiny microelectronic injection solenoids (same as locking pins
in caliper) and motors (pumps) and don't consider it a complication instead of just just whapping on carbs.
As for handbrake turns - I see no problem with that option other than not being able to control the force application too easily with a button.
It'd be fairly easy to modify the control system to provide a non-locking adjustable force solution though!
[Edited on 24/5/12 by coyoteboy]
|
|
|
