1963-66 Brake Hoses

[Joe L.]

In another thread I pictured NOS examples of the 1975-82 brake hoses and mentioned I would picture NOS examples of the earlier C2/C3 hoses later. This is the first installment. Below are photos of the 1963-66 front hose, GM #3770240 [not for sale].This hose was also used for 1955-65 passenger cars. The packaging is very old and I would say this hose was manufactured sometime during the 1963-65 period. It was discontinued from SERVICE in May, 1966 so it cannot be more recent than that. Note that this hose does have the removable "C-clip" on the upper fitting.

DSCN3883.jpgDSCN3885.jpgDSCN3884.jpg

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

Hello Joe,

I am trying to find the most correct brake hose for a 63 I am restoring and I appreciate seeing these pictures you shared last year. Obviously I wouldn't want to use 60 year old hoses, so is there a supplier that sells hoses that are correct for judging, or will all of them get deductions?

Thanks,
Todd

[Edward J.]

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

Thanks for the detail Ed. I noticed Paragon, ZIP and Corvette Central all seem to sell the same style ends, but some are gold cad plated and some are zinc. I assume the silver zinc colored ones would be best?

[James W.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

I have been looking also. I cleaned up my original rear hoses for my '65 and they are still pliable, but in the interest of safety I will be putting on new ones.

I bought a set from Doc Rebuild last year before he went off the deep end that were made by Goodyear here in America. They do not have the same outside hose diameter as the originals, but that may be because the originals have swelled. I also bought a pair from ZIP which were about the same but made over seas.

James

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

Thanks for the information James. I noticed ZIP has two different options, one is zinc plated and the other is gold cad plated which they list as "correct". Not sure which way to go...

[Joe L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

Thanks for the information James. I noticed ZIP has two different options, one is zinc plated and the other is gold cad plated which they list as "correct". Not sure which way to go...

Todd------

Note the coloration of the fittings on the very old, NOS brake hose I show above. Based on the packaging and the part number, this particular hose dates back to the early 60's. I am VERY CONFIDENT that the PRODUCTION hoses installed on early C2's were exactly the same. If any original hoses found on a car appear to have no such coloration, I am VERY CONFIDENT that it's because the chromate overplate has deteriorated over time. This very light colored chromate is VERY prone to that from exposure to the elements.

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

That is interesting Joe, thanks for the detail on color. It appears none of the box stores have the correct hose/color, so I will just order the ones that are the most correct based on all this information. Thanks for the help and Happy Thanksgiving to all!

[James W.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

So the yellow chromate finish would be the most corrrect instead of the clear (silver) zinc finish?

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

That is what I am gathering from the conversations. I also got an email from a member that has several NOS hoses from the 60's and he said they were yellow chromate finish, none were silver cad...

[Gary B.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

The current, strongly hued, gold/yellow finish may not be 100% correct. Note that Joe described the finish as “very light colored chromate”. Here are two more examples of NOS hoses from the 60s. I have about 12 such hoses, and they all look closer to silver zinc than the modern, bright yellow/gold chromate.

7423DC45-0E26-4C42-B4BC-4B1187FABE4E.jpg

The other thing to remember is the ‘66 JG says for judging guidance that “multiple crimps are acceptable”. That does not mean that hoses can’t be judged for other deviations. For example, there should be no DOT marking. The ‘66 JG also says hoses have been observed with a red, orange, or white “tracer” running the length of the hose.

Here’s what I did for the hoses on my ‘66. First, I purchased repro hoses (Paragon # 6924 & 6025) without the bright yellow chromate finish. Then I removed all the text on the hoses and the DOT, using brake fluid (for once, brake fluid was my friend in terms of paint removal! I didn’t want to use acetone in order not to risk damage to the rubber). Then I cleaned the hose surface with dish soap and water. Then I made a fixture to protect all but the width of a stripe along the length that I sprayed with flat white paint (“dye” actually; since I wanted some flexibility). I used two pieces of very thin sheet metal to delineate the stripe edges. Who knows how close this comes to recreating what an original hose looked like, but it’s the best I could do.

Here’s a photo of the simple fixture to protect everything except the stripe area for painting.

12E1F263-0ED8-4038-BE7D-2462055C8F1D.jpg

Next is the hose after painting the stripe, and removing part of the fixture.

CF3930AC-6897-44D9-8005-C76279B85240.jpg

And here are all four hoses.

367A75BB-75D7-4122-BAF4-ACD117846420.jpg

it wasn’t a difficult project, and can be duplicated inexpensively.

Gary

[Todd L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

That is awesome Gary! I really appreciate the detail you put into trying to duplicate the original look. I will definitely try to do the same on mine.

[Gary B.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

Here’s one more photo, showing the hose nested between two strips of wood to make a channel, on top of a section of 2x4. One of the pieces of sheet metal is in place on top of the hose, and clamped down with another strip of wood.

Gary

753BE5E7-800F-42CA-8B3C-FA2361A5E9BF.jpg

[Gary B.]

A969689D-C968-477B-BB02-46501A33E0B7.jpg

[Joe L.]

Re: 1963-66 Brake Hoses

The current, strongly hued, gold/yellow finish may not be 100% correct. Note that Joe described the finish as “very light colored chromate”. Here are two more examples of NOS hoses from the 60s. I have about 12 such hoses, and they all look closer to silver zinc than the modern, bright yellow/gold chromate.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]114541[/ATTACH]

The other thing to remember is the ‘66 JG says for judging guidance that “multiple crimps are acceptable”. That does not mean that hoses can’t be judged for other deviations. For example, there should be no DOT marking. The ‘66 JG also says hoses have been observed with a red, orange, or white “tracer” running the length of the hose.

Here’s what I did for the hoses on my ‘66. First, I purchased repro hoses (Paragon # 6924 & 6025) without the bright yellow chromate finish. Then I removed all the text on the hoses and the DOT, using brake fluid (for once, brake fluid was my friend in terms of paint removal! I didn’t want to use acetone in order not to risk damage to the rubber). Then I cleaned the hose surface with dish soap and water. Then I made a fixture to protect all but the width of a stripe along the length that I sprayed with flat white paint (“dye” actually; since I wanted some flexibility). I used two pieces of very thin sheet metal to delineate the stripe edges. Who knows how close this comes to recreating what an original hose looked like, but it’s the best I could do.

Here’s a photo of the simple fixture to protect everything except the stripe area for painting.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]114543[/ATTACH]

Next is the hose after painting the stripe, and removing part of the fixture.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]114544[/ATTACH]

And here are all four hoses.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]114545[/ATTACH]

it wasn’t a difficult project, and can be duplicated inexpensively.

Gary

Gary------


There's no doubt in my mind that the original hoses fittings you picture were originally of the very light chromate coloration. A very slight amount of it is still present. That's even surprising to me because it looks like these fittings have been cleaned, perhaps with a wire brush, and any vestige of the chromate overplate is usually thus removed.

The current "heavy chromate" coloration seen on current versions of various components including brake hose fittings is definitely not correct. That sort of finish was RARELY seen in the 60's and 70's.