If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits
their use? Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. the discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union. However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings = failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to hook up an icemaker! nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On Apr 12, 2:30*pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits > their use? > > Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was > saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double > flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if > I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in > the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double > flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing > apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. *the > discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a > friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear > axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle > lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd > noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union. > > However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that > "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual > references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection > standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I > don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings = > failure.) *If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your > input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. > > I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel > Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an > automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to > hook up an icemaker! > > nate > > -- > replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel I know here in Maryland compression fittings will fail on Maryland inspections. But I also have customers that use them too. As far as I know they haven't had any issues with them. I know I wouldn't want them on my car. I'll only use unions, or replace the whole line. Chas |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On 04/12/2013 02:30 PM, Nate Nagel wrote:
> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits > their use? > > Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was > saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double > flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if > I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in > the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double > flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing > apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. the > discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a > friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear > axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle > lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd > noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union. > > However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that > "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual > references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection > standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I > don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings = > failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your > input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. > > I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel > Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an > automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to > hook up an icemaker! > > nate > Proof that anyone can spew advice on the interwebs http://www.ehow.com/how_5499634_spli...ake-lines.html Sadly, ehow doesn't seem to have a "-1" button. I'm guessing most intelligent people take anything posted there with a shaker of salt anyway, but really, this is astonishingly irresponsible. nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On 04/12/2013 02:50 PM, m6onz5a wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2:30 pm, Nate Nagel > wrote: >> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits >> their use? >> >> Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was >> saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double >> flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if >> I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in >> the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double >> flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing >> apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. the >> discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a >> friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear >> axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle >> lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd >> noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union. >> >> However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that >> "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual >> references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection >> standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I >> don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings = >> failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your >> input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. >> >> I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel >> Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an >> automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to >> hook up an icemaker! >> >> nate >> >> -- >> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel > > I know here in Maryland compression fittings will fail on Maryland > inspections. But I also have customers that use them too. As far as I > know they haven't had any issues with them. I know I wouldn't want > them on my car. I'll only use unions, or replace the whole line. > > Chas > is there a publicly available document that explicitly states that compression fittings should fail a safety inspection? This is actually pertinent as the guy to whom I was talking is in MD but not an inspector and I'm sure he'd appreciate a correction if it saves him from potential future liability down the road. nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits > their use? > will you settle for proof (almost) by contradiction?; http://standards.sae.org/j2879_201107/ indicates that SAE spec J2879 "applies to 90 degree double inverted flares used on common sizes of automotive hydraulic brake tubes, and their associated tube nuts and mating ports" every test I've ever taken, had as the correct answer for brake line repair, "use a double flare". and that's enough for me, GW |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On 4/12/2013 1:59 PM, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 02:30 PM, Nate Nagel wrote: >> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows >> or prohibits >> their use? >> >> Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the >> wrench was >> saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting >> than double >> flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my >> position was that if >> I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut >> and splice in >> the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always >> use a double >> flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the >> fitting blowing >> apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing >> itself. the >> discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair >> I'd done on a >> friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose >> to the rear >> axle had failed and replacement required replacement of >> both the axle >> lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, >> and he'd >> noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double >> flare union. >> >> However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of >> opinions that >> "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to >> actual >> references nor could I find anything in the pertinent >> safety inspection >> standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever >> been, so I >> don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that >> compression fittings = >> failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd >> appreciate your >> input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. >> >> I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a >> good steel >> Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the >> pressures used in an >> automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like >> you'd use to >> hook up an icemaker! >> >> nate >> > > Proof that anyone can spew advice on the interwebs > > http://www.ehow.com/how_5499634_spli...ake-lines.html > > > Sadly, ehow doesn't seem to have a "-1" button. I'm > guessing most intelligent people take anything posted there > with a shaker of salt anyway, but really, this is > astonishingly irresponsible. > > nate > I don't know. A quick web search shows this discussion in multiple venues with several comments such as 'will probably be OK' without direct experience and also 'will fail inspection' but no statute cited. Of course it may be an administrative policy rather than a statute. Or not. Frankly I don't see any problem with a normal flared line which logically seems matched to a 'high stakes risk when it breaks' application. Flares and flaring tools are cheap, well supported, ubiquitous and not complex. If any of my cars had dual-diagonal braking systems and if I were away from civilization (new brake line and/or a flaring tool), I _might_ think about a compression fitting. But they don't and so I don't. -- Andrew Muzi <www.yellowjersey.org/> Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On 04/12/2013 05:21 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/12/2013 1:59 PM, Nate Nagel wrote: >> On 04/12/2013 02:30 PM, Nate Nagel wrote: >>> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows >>> or prohibits >>> their use? >>> >>> Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the >>> wrench was >>> saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting >>> than double >>> flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my >>> position was that if >>> I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut >>> and splice in >>> the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always >>> use a double >>> flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the >>> fitting blowing >>> apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing >>> itself. the >>> discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair >>> I'd done on a >>> friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose >>> to the rear >>> axle had failed and replacement required replacement of >>> both the axle >>> lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, >>> and he'd >>> noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double >>> flare union. >>> >>> However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of >>> opinions that >>> "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to >>> actual >>> references nor could I find anything in the pertinent >>> safety inspection >>> standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever >>> been, so I >>> don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that >>> compression fittings = >>> failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd >>> appreciate your >>> input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. >>> >>> I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a >>> good steel >>> Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the >>> pressures used in an >>> automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like >>> you'd use to >>> hook up an icemaker! >>> >>> nate >>> >> >> Proof that anyone can spew advice on the interwebs >> >> http://www.ehow.com/how_5499634_spli...ake-lines.html >> >> >> Sadly, ehow doesn't seem to have a "-1" button. I'm >> guessing most intelligent people take anything posted there >> with a shaker of salt anyway, but really, this is >> astonishingly irresponsible. >> >> nate >> > > I don't know. > > A quick web search shows this discussion in multiple venues with several > comments such as 'will probably be OK' without direct experience and > also 'will fail inspection' but no statute cited. Of course it may be > an administrative policy rather than a statute. Or not. > > Frankly I don't see any problem with a normal flared line which > logically seems matched to a 'high stakes risk when it breaks' > application. Flares and flaring tools are cheap, well supported, > ubiquitous and not complex. > > If any of my cars had dual-diagonal braking systems and if I were away > from civilization (new brake line and/or a flaring tool), I _might_ > think about a compression fitting. But they don't and so I don't. I agree 100% with your position, problem is that I'm advocating your position but I can't find any official backup to it (at least in MD or VA; I have found explicit references for other farther away states) therefore I'll never change the guy's mind as to what is and isn't a proper repair as I don't really have any backup. For my own part I will continue to flare... BTW is it just me or has steel tubing gotten softer over the years? I had to do three different flares to make the repair, one under the vehicle (which always scares me, I prefer working on the bench) and they weren't nearly as much of a PITA as I remembered. I did deburr the lines and dress with a file before attempting to flare but I was doing that before as well. Been years since I've had to break out the flaring tool and I can't say that I really miss it, but it is awful handy to have (and it just looks more professional when your lines are the exact right length rather than having loops in them...) nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits > their use? > > Was having a discussion with a mechanic yesterday and the wrench was > saying that it was easier to use a compression fitting than double > flaring and he didn't have a problem using them; my position was that if > I needed to replace a hard line where it was easier to cut and splice in > the middle than rerun the whole thing that I would always use a double > flare and a union, because of the impossibility of the fitting blowing > apart under pressure save for a failure of the tubing itself. the > discussion was prompted because he was looking at a repair I'd done on a > friend's vehicle when the rear brakes had failed; the hose to the rear > axle had failed and replacement required replacement of both the axle > lines and the back half of the rear body line due to rust, and he'd > noticed that the one splice that I'd done was a double flare union. > > However when I went to research the issue I see a lot of opinions that > "it's illegal" to use compression fittings but no links to actual > references nor could I find anything in the pertinent safety inspection > standards (NB: I'm not a vehicle inspector nor have I ever been, so I > don't know if there is an "unwritten rule" that compression fittings = > failure.) If anyone has any knowledge of this issue I'd appreciate your > input esp. if it is specific to VA, MD, or DC. > > I also certainly hope that the mechanic was referring to a good steel > Swagelok fitting (which is at least rated for the pressures used in an > automotive brake application) and not the brass ones like you'd use to > hook up an icemaker! > > nate > Maryland inspection regarding brakes. Procedures: Reject Vehicle If: (a) Hydraulic System—Visually inspect condition of hydraulic system. (i) Inspect wheel cylinders for leakage and operation. Do not remove dust covers. (ii) Inspect hydraulic hoses and brake lines for leaks, cracks, chafing, flattened or restricted sections, improper support, rusting causing pitting, and improper material. (iii) Inspect master cylinder for leakage and fluid level of all sections. (Be sure no dirt gets into reservoir when cover is removed and that the gasket is serviceable.) (a) (i) Wheel cylinder leaks or fails to operate. (ii) Hoses, or brake lines are cracked, chafed, flattened, restricted, or are rusted and pitting is visible, are improperly supported, or lines have been repaired or replaced with copper tubing or other material not designed for hydraulic brake lines. Hoses or brake lines are mounted to contact wheels or body during steering or suspension movement. (iii) Master cylinder leaks. (iv) The fluid level in any section is less than 1/2 full. (v) The gasket does not properly seal master cylinder. Compression fittings fall under the "material not designed for hydraulic brake lines" Connecticut: BRAKE LINES - Tubing must be steel and properly attached and supported (at least every 18") and hoses shall not be kinked, twisted, or frayed. Hoses must not be under tension during full right and full left-hand turn, or during full compression or full extension of suspension. Automotive stainless steel tubing and braided hoses are acceptable but compression fitting will not be allowed. In NY they are specifically called out as an automatic fail if used on any part of the brake system as well. -- Steve W. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
Geoff Welsh wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote: >> Does anyone have a link to any law or standard that allows or prohibits >> their use? >> > > will you settle for proof (almost) by contradiction?; > > http://standards.sae.org/j2879_201107/ > > indicates that SAE spec J2879 "applies to 90 degree double inverted > flares used on common sizes of automotive hydraulic brake tubes, and > their associated tube nuts and mating ports" > > every test I've ever taken, had as the correct answer for brake line > repair, "use a double flare". > > and that's enough for me, > GW The problem is that some states don't have anything in the requirements other than something general like "the brakes must stop the vehicle" REALLY?? I know a few states specifically call attention to compression fittings being bad juju. Personally by the time you get the correct compression fitting size, get the line clean enough to seal and cut correctly, it it faster and easier to spool out some line and flare it. I keep a good supply of line in steel, stainless and cunifer on hand. plus all the fittings and about 4 different flare tools. -- Steve W. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
compression fittings on brake lines
On 2013-04-12, AMuzi > wrote:
> A quick web search shows this discussion in multiple venues > with several comments such as 'will probably be OK' without > direct experience and also 'will fail inspection' but no > statute cited. Of course it may be an administrative policy > rather than a statute. Or not. > > Frankly I don't see any problem with a normal flared line > which logically seems matched to a 'high stakes risk when it > breaks' application. Flares and flaring tools are cheap, > well supported, ubiquitous and not complex. Some folks even argue that adding the additional flare fittings in the line is too dangerous. I disagreed with this as I have found that flare fittings once they aren't leaking they'll never leak until someone attempts to take them apart and the line breaks because the fittings are rusted together. > If any of my cars had dual-diagonal braking systems and if I > were away from civilization (new brake line and/or a flaring > tool), I _might_ think about a compression fitting. But they > don't and so I don't. In a pinch to get home yeah... just about anything goes under such conditions. If I had no flare tool and all I could get a hold of was plumbing materials... ok... that's desparation mode to hobble carefully home or to the nearest place where the proper materials could be purchased. For an actual long-term repair? no. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Compression Fittings On Brake Lines ? | Robert11 | Technology | 10 | April 13th 07 06:34 PM |
Bleeding brake lines and replacing brake caliper and piston | Jason[_1_] | Ford Explorer | 2 | March 20th 07 01:42 AM |
Getting fuel line compression fittings leak free | Ed | Technology | 22 | January 9th 07 05:50 PM |
Info: Note on Ford brake-line fittings | Backyard Mechanic | Ford Mustang | 0 | April 17th 06 03:54 PM |
VW Brake Lines | Morgan Anderson | VW air cooled | 12 | November 27th 05 01:32 PM |