Zip typing proportioning valve higher

Clever on paper anyway.


Bill do the 2nd gen 5 lugs use it? I always thought it was just for the off road models.

 

Well, if you don't try, you'll never know what works. Many successful innovations were a crackpot idea.

 

True. Evident all over forums where people are willing to try things the factory wouldn't.

I wish I had access (and time) to try some different springs on the shoes. My thought was that w/ the size wheel cylinders they don't overcome the tight springs and just let the shoes drag a bit unloaded.

 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_IWjr5CUWJQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

I'm qourious to see how it performs in wet or otherwise slippery conditions. My rear used to easily lock up before the front with everything stock in the wet (I don't have ABS). Giving it a stronger rear brake bias would make me nervous. I would have to do a lot of testing before I would be comfortable driving it.

 

OP, any updates? Still happy with how it preforms? Have you tested it in different conditions? Wet, lose rock? I would ask about snow but I doubt that opportunity has come up in the last 6 months...

 

Why not just leave the mechanism where the factory engineers designed it to go? They didn't just put it there for shits and giggles.

If you lift it, get a bracket that moves the part attached to the axle that much farther up to compensate.

Tying the thing to the frame IMO is an extremely bad idea and you're just asking for your rear wheels to lock up. If you think it's not working properly, replace it.

 

No real updates. I've been out wheeling with it a few times and no issues. I've become so used to how well it brakes that there's no way I'm going back unless it becomes hazardous in other conditions. When the rain and snow hit, I'll make update again, but it's been a dry summer.

I understand your argument and have heard it from other people as well. I'm not advocating other people do it permanently, merely suggesting that they try it. I believe that with my truck, it is far less dangerous than you believe. I always have a camper shell on (increased rear weight). I also have wider and larger tires which reduce the risk of wheel lockup.

As far as brackets go, I had the OME bracket on there and wasn't satisfied which is why I decided to test the operation of the rear brakes like this. I also found that the BAMF bracket (that a lot of people run with lifts), lifts that proportioning valve rod to the max braking position anyway.

I don't believe I will change your opinion as you argued it fairly passionately, just putting some of the factors i thought about when doing this out there.

 

The point of the brackets is to maintain the exact same position of the valve, after having moved the axle farther from frame because of a lift. The brackets don't move the valve thing any closer to the frame than it would otherwise be. The valve compensates for weight in the bed, but also, during brake dive (when the bed moves upward during heavy braking), the valve compensates and further reduces brake power to limit or prevent the tires from locking up.

What you've done is tell the truck that the bed never moves under heavy braking, and you always have it loaded to the maximum weight (over loaded, actually).

Sure, you get more braking power, but all that added power does absolutley nothing when the tires break traction.

I am putting the factors out there that I believe you have not adequately considered. While the things you mention (wider tires and increased weight) do reduce the risk of a skid, it does not prevent it, and I believe can make things worse in many situations.

The engineers and the road safety regulators went through a LOT of trouble to ensure the brakes worked as well as they possibly could.

If you're really dead set on trying to improve the functionality of the brakes, I would suggest making the braket longer than "technically" needed (i.e. A 3" bracket for a 2" lift) to give "more" braking power, but still leave intact the ability to reduce brake power when the rear stinkbugs. Then go out and drive the shit out of it, drive on steep down grades and slam on the brakes, etc...

 

I've been driving it modified like this since march (when the OP was made) and I really do like it. I'm not going to change anything. I see your arguments and acknowledge them as valid. My rebuttals are as follows:

1. I only lock up the tires when really hitting the brakes, when they would normally lock up anyway

2. If/when the tires lock up, ABS kicks in and unlocks them anyway.

I understand why the proportioning valve is there and what it does. And I do appreciate your concern. The fact that you took the time to type out these long replies shows that you care a lot. I'm not trying to frustrate you or tell you that you're wrong, because you are 100% right. I'm just saying that I like it the way it is and am going to keep it that way.

 

It was nice knowing you .

 

So wait, your wheels lock up, but they don't lock up?

I'm confused.

I'm also just bored at home, and I like the sound of my own voice (figuratively, of course).

I just think you're asking for trouble, despite your being happy with it. I know my father in law was happy with the deck he built/repaired, but I didn't step foot on it because he red necked it together and used 2x4's for the railing posts (20' high deck), and spaced the joists too far appart so the trex decking sagged, beyond tht I didn't look too closely. No one died, but he has since rebuilt it properly, too.

Look, my point is to not try and convince yu that you should be unhappy with what you did, you obviously like the result. My point is that you are takingg far more risk than any percieved gain.

Another option, and probably the best option to get more braking power, is to go for the tundra brakes.

I get it, we all take risks with the mods we do. I'm currently driving around wihout a swaybar, but it's not a daily driver, and my King coilovers do a nice job of minimizing the body roll. I also slow more than I used to for corners. I jsut draw the line at removing rear brake control.

Cheers, best of luck to you.

 

I didn't bother reading any of the responses. Because this question will always receive a lot of cunt-@$$ feedback.
But I know it's an old post. So...

I have Bamf's 5.5" PV lift bracket. I'm lifted 4" in the rear. And it's adjusted at the highest setting. I'm +700 over stock everyday and 1100-1300 when loaded. And I'll never drop it back down because braking has been the best in this configuration (stock calips) . I also have an 11 leaf Dakar pack, the height of the pack basically determines your lift, but ymmv. Been running this four years.

 

I did this after a lift and it helped a little, but there wasn't a really big change. I disconnected the end that was bolted to the axle and zip tied it to the underside of the bed. I got a little more brake in the rear but nothing dramatic. I have a campershell so there is some weight over the rear axle anyways. My rears don't lock up any more than they used to.

 

Funny the Toyota Vehicles were the first to have any brake Valves to keep the rear brakes from locking up .

One just drives according to conditions .

Then in the seventies there were not near so many vehicles on the road kinda why I almost don`t enjoy driving .

Here in the Great Rust Belt every LSPV that was on my $300.00 4x4`s was rusted so bad it would not move .

After buying the first one from the dealer all the rest either got a Manual valve or was removed .

 

that just means the bracket is not tall enough. The best way to really do it is to measure from bottom of fender lip to bottom of wheel, then measure again after installing the lift. Once you have the difference, make a bracket in equal length. My guess is that the bracket is still too short. I had to make one that was 3-3.5" long to go back to stock braking behavior, even though my leaf springs were supposed to be 2.5" lift.

 

When I installed my lift years ago I unknowingly missed the bracket for the LSPV. It took a few weeks to figure out why as I never knew about the valve, but I definitely noticed a strong front bias and reduced braking performance. I installed said bracket and got back my proper feel.

I have installed proportioning valves in road track cars and I am familiar with setting them up properly. Why anyone would remove braking performance is beyond me. No rear brakes is not good nor is it safe. You risk overheating your fronts and glazing your rotors, further reducing your braking performance and longevity and could crack your rotors. Ie, more money out of your pocket to fix. To much rear and you risk a lock up and a spin, especially in wet or slick conditions. Also bad.

Just free advice. It's there to take or to leave. This is not a good idea for you, pedestrians, your passengers, or other motorists. You have to be able to stop.

Edit:

It sounds like you fully understand what we are saying which makes it more baffling for all of us why you choose to ignore sound logic.

I'd do a braking test from a few different speeds to conclude that "feel" equates to "performance". I know you like the feel of the brakes but as a father with a 4 yo boy and 2 yo girl, I can't stress safety for others enough. Sorry, I never knew I cared so much until I had my own.

Do a panic stop from 25 and measure to simulate a kid running into the street. Then perhaps a panic stop from a higher speed to simulate a family stopping at a new yellow light. Compare both setups.

 

Instead of unbolting it and tying it, I've seen others bend the rod w/a brake line tool to level the rod. This is just as good as the relocator, it really works instead of adding a bracket.