Volvo RWD 140-160 Forum

INDEX FOR 10/2025(CURRENT) INDEX FOR 10/2009 140-160 INDEX

[<<]  [>>]


THREADED THREADED EXPANDED FLAT PRINT ALL
MESSAGES IN THIS THREAD




  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

Okay here's how it goes:
From Newandusedvolvoparts.com:
- New Balo rotors all around for $120
- New brake hoses all around for $90
- PBR Deluxe front pads and Metal Master rear pads $35
From Autozone:
- New Girling front calipers - $80 + core
- New Girling rear calipers - $80 + core

So, roughly $400 for parts. I did not originally know that Metal Masters were available for our cars. Also, parts for the 164 are very hard to find and more expensive. This way, nothing will have to be modified. And using Metal Masters only on the rear SHOULD help increase the rear braking bias... (correct? or do they just have a higher heat capacity, if that is the case, I'll use them in the front as well.)
So what do you guys think???
Kyle








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

I agree with Phil. Get it fixed with standard eqpt first and see if it
isn't pretty good already.

As far as the difference in parts availability, I have had very little trouble
getting parts for my 164, and in fact the majority of them are the same as
for the 140s. I'm not convinced, for example, that 164 brakes are any different from 144 brakes, although some use a different booster.

The 164 motor mounts are different, and I strongly recommend them.
--
George Downs, The "original" Walrus3, Bartlesville, Oklahoma








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

Agreed.... the 164 pads are all the same as 140 (same differences twixt ATE $ Girling apply). Only difference I know is in the later cars with the vented front rotors, and subsequently wider calipers. But the pads are still the same.

Booster in my '72 is also different than a 140... not sure about your early example...

-Matt








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

I'm not sure which ones, but some of the 140s have the same type of booster
as the 164 although it is mounted on a spool and requires slight modification
to work on a 164. (Ask me how I know)
Most have a larger, flatter one which may give a little easier touch on
the brakes than the smaller cylindrical one on the 164.
Still got a big bushing for you. I'll try to remember to ship it to you
next week.

--
George Downs, The "original" Walrus3, Bartlesville, Oklahoma








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

Kyle thats a lot to be spending on brakes. I recently got done sorting out the brakes on my 69 142 and this is how it came out.I have girling rears that were siezed so i got a pair at the junkyard of a 240 (the kind without that big metal protrusion) for 20 bucks. drilled the mount holes a little bigger and got a rebuild kit from bartosh mtrs for another 20. with the steel lines for the rear from ipd at 50 bucks and turning the rotors (another 20) thats 110 bucks for the rears. My 142 came with all the 164 goodies up front but the ate calipers were also frozen so bad that i couldn't get one of the pistons out on both calipers so they were tossed. I was lucky to find a pair of rebuild ate calipers on ebay for 50 bucks. I also bought and still have a rebuild kit for the ate's that cost 40 bucks. The lines are a bit tricky, I got 4 24" size an4 lines from ebay for 60 bucks and had to spend another 30or 40 for fittings, if your really bent on having steel braided line up front I would make my own if I were you and I recomend using size AN3. So after all said and done I finally got the system I wanted for about 300 dollars. But once it's sorted the real stopping power is all in the pads I spent 70 bucks for hawk blue type pads for the rear, and they cost 118 for the pads up front. Ive only been able to afford the rears so far and they produce a lot of dust. I'd probobly try to find someone or junkyard with 164 rotors and calipers and rebuild them your self. That way you don't have to worry as much when your romping on the brake petal and your wondering if the 10 year old in the sweat shop that rebuilt your calipers did a good job or not.

Goodluck, Aaron








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

I was just at the U-pullit in Tigard and all of their 240s had a bunch of other extra metal on them...(they looked much bigger and more complex and confusing...) Also, how would I make the parking brake work?
Thanks,
Kyle








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

I'd use the same pads all around. If the whole system is working right, there's no need to increase rear brake bias. The Metal Masters hold up to heat better, so if you just put them one place, the bias will vary depending on how hot the brakes are.

Phil's Rule of the Month (Year, Decade...):
Don't make changes to what Volvo engineered until after you've driven it working the way they designed it.








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1969

Just to clear up a few ideas that were mentioned ,(out of order).The front 140 and 164 (vented) pads are not the same.The calipers are not the same either.I think the confusion is coming from half of us looking at solid rotor early 164's while the rest of are talking later 164 vented stuff.
The 240 rear calipers work great on your 140.The parking brake works fine because it engages inside the rotor which you will leave alone when you change the rear calipers.
The 164 and 140 boosters are not the same.The 164 booster mounts at a slight angle and doesn't use the mounting bracket like a 140 but rather bolts directly to the firewall.
I still reccomend the 164 lug studs when changing front parts.You want the lug nut completely screwed on with a little lug stud sticking out the top.(do it right!)
I know this a strong statement but anyone who believes the 164 front swap isn't worth the money or tracking down the parts simply hasn't done the swap.It is night and day provided you use quality parts.I've converted 10+ 140's over the years and the happy customers make the strongest statement!








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1974

I have a 74 164...is this considered a "later" model? Havent checked the rotors yet to see if they are vented. I think I'll be needing pads all round soon....who has the best prices for pads for a daily driver type car?








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Winnipeg164... 140-160 1974

This is considered a "later" model, most of the 164 models from 72 on came equipped w/vented front rotors which is probably what you have. I would suggest ordering PBR Dulexe pads from Newandusedvolvoparts.com ($20.32)they have very low prices on stuff, comparable pads from IPD cost $23.40 ON SALE...
thats all,
Later,
Kyle








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1969

I'm certainly not against modifications... far from it! (Anyone who knows me is now laughing...)

But the fact remains that all too often, someone spends a lot of money and effort on mods because they're unsatisfied with the performance of a worn-out system. A proper repair using stock components may be all that's required. It's really something to keep an eye on.

8^)








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1969

I never accused anyone of being against modification! Who doesn't like trying one from column "A" in column "B"! While I agree that often times peoples problems are caused by worn out parts,I think there is an assumption (maybe incorrectly on my part) that most people here that are driving 30 year old volvos are looking for a "little more" out of their volvos.If I was trolling a generic old car board and someone posted say, a brake pull issue I wouldn't tell them to upgrade to 164 stuff.They probably wouldn't go to the hassle and expense,it just wouldn't be what they needed.(Although I do admit it works so well I couldn't resist at least mentioning the switch as an option!) Stock replacement parts would be fine.On the other hand if your looking for IMPROVED brake performance and I believe as hard driving enthusiasts,most of us are,I stick with my original statement:"If you don't believe they are better you havn't made the switch".I'd put a worn out set of 164 parts (cheapest pads,underspec rotors,dot 3 fluid etc) against a set of new 140 calipers,new rotors,finest pads,racing brakefluid etc and the 164 would stop better.I wish it were only speculation but it's 14 years of driving both!
This reminds of the several discussions I've had over the years with people who tell me cars with limited slip don't handle any better on dry roads,I havn't spoken to one who didn't have a different opinion after driving a car with it!
I also feel there's a reason that any car of any significance these days HAS vented rotors!
To sum it up if your volvo is "point A to point B" and maybe your looking into an 1983 chevy citation anyway stick with the stock stuff,it'll serve you well.If you plan on keeping the car for a while and maybe enjoy a little extra pressure on the "stupid peddle" you'd do yourself a favor upgrading!
Alot of us have upgraded our engines power,don't leave your brakes behind!








  REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Final Decision on brakes: 140-160 1968

The 240 rear caliper upgrade is an awesome idea but which 240 calipers do I use? Girling or ATE? I will only swap up to these parts and 164 parts if I can find them cheap. Otherwise stock stuff will be enough for now...
LAter
kyle







<< < > >>



©Jarrod Stenberg 1997-2022. All material except where indicated.


All participants agree to these terms.

Brickboard.com is not affiliated with nor sponsored by AB Volvo, Volvo Car Corporation, Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. or Ford Motor Company. Brickboard.com is a Volvo owner/enthusiast site, similar to a club, and does not intend to pose as an official Volvo site. The official Volvo site can be found here.