I'm curious about the Cleveland wheel/brake STC for Cessna 180/185s (the "199-62" conversion kit). I have it on my '65, but with hard brakes lines the entire way. I just got a leak in one so I'm going to replace the bottom 12" with flex lines to the calipers, per the STC. While looking at the Cleveland drawings, I notice there is a note that indicates the flex line routing to be under the gear leg. Most installs I have seen have the brake line routed above the gear leg.

What is the thinking there? I assume routing above keeps it from getting snagged on debris when off-field, but are there other considerations? Anyone know if Cleveland had a specific reason to routing under the gear leg?

Chris

airChris wrote:I'm curious about the Cleveland wheel/brake STC for Cessna 180/185s (the "199-62" conversion kit). I have it on my '65, but with hard brakes lines the entire way. I just got a leak in one so I'm going to replace the bottom 12" with flex lines to the calipers, per the STC. While looking at the Cleveland drawings, I notice there is a note that indicates the flex line routing to be under the gear leg. Most installs I have seen have the brake line routed above the gear leg.

What is the thinking there? I assume routing above keeps it from getting snagged on debris when off-field, but are there other considerations? Anyone know if Cleveland had a specific reason to routing under the gear leg?

Chris

Routing above the leg I believe has more to do with avoiding a low point in the line, which can complicate bleeding the brakes. It’s possible (probable?) to get an air bubble that’s hard to push out.

MTV

Since the Cleveland STC drawing specifically notes "flexible hose assembly to be routed under gear", I'd just do it.
They probably had a reason, maybe like MTV said to avoid low points in the line.
Besides, installation has to be in accordance with the STC paperwork to be legal.

The flex brake line on my 180 is installed under the gear leg.
It is quite a bit longer than what the drawing shows,
but since they don't call out any specific dimensions I guess that's no big deal.

hotrod180 wrote:Since the Cleveland STC drawing specifically notes "flexible hose assembly to be routed under gear", I'd just do it.
They probably had a reason, maybe like MTV said to avoid low points in the line.
Besides, installation has to be in accordance with the STC paperwork to be legal.

The flex brake line on my 180 is installed under the gear leg.
It is quite a bit longer than what the drawing shows,
but since they don't call out any specific dimensions I guess that's no big deal.

Wait, they should install in accordance to the drawing since that’s the only legal way, but yours is installed not in accordance with the drawing?

CamTom12 wrote:

hotrod180 wrote:Since the Cleveland STC drawing specifically notes "flexible hose assembly to be routed under gear", I'd just do it.
They probably had a reason, maybe like MTV said to avoid low points in the line.
Besides, installation has to be in accordance with the STC paperwork to be legal.

The flex brake line on my 180 is installed under the gear leg.
It is quite a bit longer than what the drawing shows,
but since they don't call out any specific dimensions I guess that's no big deal.

Wait, they should install in accordance to the drawing since that’s the only legal way, but yours is installed not in accordance with the drawing?

Good one, Cam...!

MTV

I just put these new Alaska wheels and brakes on replacing the McCauley's. The Mac's were over the top into a straight fitting. It looked like that would hit the 29 Bushwheels when I put them on so I elected to do this. My 54 180 that I've owned since 1988 came with this routing too.

CamTom12 wrote:....Wait, they should install in accordance to the drawing since that’s the only legal way, but yours is installed not in accordance with the drawing?

Since they do not call out a length (maximum, minimum, or whatever) for the flex line, I'd say mine is in accordance with the drawing.

hotrod180 wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:....Wait, they should install in accordance to the drawing since that’s the only legal way, but yours is installed not in accordance with the drawing?

Since they do not call out a length (maximum, minimum, or whatever) for the flex line, I'd say mine is in accordance with the drawing.

I guess I misunderstood - I thought you said yours was installed under the gear leg, as in from the bottom of the caliper.

Mine (E-AB) were originally installed from the bottom and they bled just fine. I moved them to the top to eliminate an off-airport snag hazard. They still bleed and brake just fine. No change in performance.

I've installed many of these... I run them with a straight fitting out of the caliper OVER the gear leg using a 12" braided SS hose w/ teflon interior. The main reason is to keep from fowling. (I dont like them at all under.)

If your really worried about the drawings, then just install them with SA02231AK rather than SA63GL.

Greg-

Bigrenna wrote:I've installed many of these... I run them with a straight fitting out of the caliper OVER the gear leg using a 12" braided SS hose w/ teflon interior. The main reason is to keep from fowling. (I dont like them at all under.)

If your really worried about the drawings, then just install them with SA02231AK rather than SA63GL.

Greg-

What are your thoughts on full length braided hoses Greg?

I don't know why Cleveland has that 90 degree elbow on everything, most likely it is what was on the shelf. I thing in most cases a 45 degree elbow is better for avoiding air trapping in most applications. Gregs ideal of a straight fitting is great in this application. A SS flex line to the fuselage fitting is a KISS plan on most aircraft. DENNY

daedaluscan wrote:

Bigrenna wrote:I've installed many of these... I run them with a straight fitting out of the caliper OVER the gear leg using a 12" braided SS hose w/ teflon interior. The main reason is to keep from fowling. (I dont like them at all under.)

If your really worried about the drawings, then just install them with SA02231AK rather than SA63GL.

Greg-

What are your thoughts on full length braided hoses Greg?

Not a big fan. I like the hard line/soft line combo as Cessna did it.

Bigrenna wrote:

daedaluscan wrote:

Bigrenna wrote:I've installed many of these... I run them with a straight fitting out of the caliper OVER the gear leg using a 12" braided SS hose w/ teflon interior. The main reason is to keep from fowling. (I dont like them at all under.)

If your really worried about the drawings, then just install them with SA02231AK rather than SA63GL.

Greg-

What are your thoughts on full length braided hoses Greg?

Not a big fan. I like the hard line/soft line combo as Cessna did it.

Long runs, even with braided hoses, can lead to spongy brakes as the hose expands (even just a little bit) under pressure. Metal lines don’t expand.

hotrod180 wrote:Since they do not call out a length (maximum, minimum, or whatever) for the flex line, I'd say mine is in accordance with the drawing.

The drawing I have from Cleveland (Dwg# 50-36 rev E) definitely defines the length of the flex line at 12". It also calls out a part number "or equivalent." Obviously, what you have works fine, but as an "FYI" I thought I'd point it out here.

So the next choice is SS braid or regular Stratoflex 111 hose? Precision Hose prefers 111 suggesting it is thicker walled and has a higher burst rating. But SS braid has a nice look to it. Any opinions on that?

Chris

Bigrenna wrote:I've installed many of these... I run them with a straight fitting out of the caliper OVER the gear leg using a 12" braided SS hose w/ teflon interior. The main reason is to keep from fowling. (I dont like them at all under.)

If your really worried about the drawings, then just install them with SA02231AK rather than SA63GL.

Greg-

Interesting, I only use angled fittings and install them under the gear leg. Besides being compliant with the approved data, it makes for a more aerodynamic installation.

This is how I routed mine when I did Cleveland wheel/brake swap. Ditched the McCauley stuff due to cracked wheel and cracked/leaking caliper. Is it wrong according to the drawing…? I dunno. But it definitely seems like a good route.
B

airChris wrote:.....The drawing I have from Cleveland (Dwg# 50-36 rev E) definitely defines the length of the flex line at 12". It also calls out a part number "or equivalent." Obviously, what you have works fine, but as an "FYI" I thought I'd point it out here. ....

Thanks for pointing out that note, I missed it. As you said, my set-up works fine, but now I'm wondering how long my flex brake line is.
FWIW that 50-36 drawing isn't necessarily to scale, but the flex line as they show it definitely looks shorter than 12".

FWIW that 50-36 drawing isn't necessarily to scale, but the flex line as they show it definitely looks shorter than 12".

I measured my stainless flex line and it is about 8 inches.

Just measured mine, they're about 16".
So between me & Marty, we average out to 12".
Perfect!

hotrod180 wrote:Just measured mine, they're about 16".
So between me & Marty, we average out to 12".
Perfect!

:D