Brakes: How is the Parking Brake cable housing "attached" to the rear backing plates?? ( '57 GHawk)

[bsrosell]

This one amazes me; my Parking brake system was broken and cable broke, BUT the original housing was attached yet....
I recall when I took the rear-end apart, I just ASSUMED the little 'entry covers' or 'ears' that the cable fits into on the back of the brake backing plate needed to 'come off', and unscrewed the nuts from inside and removed them, and the parking brake cable obviously 'came apart' with that effort.

NOW, getting a NOS cable (after breaking the cheap plastic hose on the repro cable, trying to contort it into that awful shape!?) I find the ends are the same! And, my originals (obviously) just like the NOS cable; both ends of the "wire mesh" protective housing are made for a notched retainer; Studebaker only USED that notch at the TOP of the frame; WHY WOULD THEY HAVE IT down at the backing plate?

SO, how are you SUPPOSED to (how did the factory?) keep these housings in place? See the photos, but from what I can see in the shop manuals, my "contorted" shape (which broke the repro plastic housing) is correct. PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong there.
BUT, this 'contorted shape" puts a lot of force to push the parking-brake housing down into the backing plate; IS THAT THEIR DESIGN FOR HOLDING IT IN PLACE? I tried loosening the "ears/entry plate" and "pinching" the housing ends (why didn't they use a retainer clip, OR, put a tapered end on those housings or something???). One 'caught' and pinched it a bit, the other does not and only the 'contortion' of the stiff cable is forcing it to stay put.

Again, since I NEVER would have thought these would be "loose", I never tried to pull my originals out of the backing plate upon disassembly. AND, seems when the springs flex they are going to occasionally wack into the housings as well.... But for the life of me, see no other way to get from "point A" (backing plate) to "point B" (retainer on upper crossmember).

Would appreciate knowing if this VERY strange arrangement is "factory" (no seal at ALL?, no 'locking in place' at all?), or if I am badly missing something obvious... Attached photos show what I've got, and appear to match the only photos I can find in the shop manual that happen to show the undercarriage for some other reason....
Thanks!
Barry

[StudeRich]

Wow that Cable in Pic #2 (L/R Wheel) is WAY longer than Original!
Why does Pic. #4 look so much better? Is that just the angle of the Picture?

I have never seen one with that huge "Drip Loop" in it.
Doesn't the little "Cover" retainer with the 2 self tapping screws have a ridge on it that locks into a grove on the Cable Housing end?

[r1lark]

Your ebrake conduit end is not inserted far enough into the hole - the retainer is not 'grabbing' the end corrrectly. See the attached picture of the backing plate on my '54 sedan, which has been upgraded with brakes from a '62 GT Hawk. Also, the retainers are different between right and left - make sure you have the correct one on the correct side.

[bsrosell]

Wow those Cables are WAY longer than Original!
I have never seen one with that huge "Drip Loop" in it.
Doesn't the little "Cover" retainer with the 2 self tapping screws have a ridge on it that locks into a grove on the Cable Housing end?

A) I agree, seems too long; but LENGTH is the same as my originals (and the repros from Stude vendor were WORSE, as I said, the plastic housing cracked). See photo;

B) YOU ROCK! I was going to say "no, the ears were smooth" and went to take a photo to show this, and noticed there IS a tiny ridge. OK, before you say "idiot" (loudly anyway), I DID try to push these things in initially and 'capture' with the little covers, and the 'ears' were so far from "closing' up tight to the backing plate I "knew" that wasn't right. BUT, trying again, with that notch now in my mind, IT FITS! See new photo. King for the day Rich! :-) Thanks!. BUT, still a lot of bend and holding the 'original' up to it, it naturally "fell" into that same curve from all those years, so I think it's right, unless I can "flip" the curve some how, farther away from the springs. Have to "re-do" the other side yet, will try again while it is "loose" on the end... Thanks man! All in the details.....

[bsrosell]

Thanks Paul, see reply to Rich. And, embarrassed to say, I had to remove and swap the 'ears' (before painting...); after carefully looking at them to make sure they were 'right'. :-) Can you have dyslexia of spatial orientation of parts? Not the first time I've put the right side on "left" side; have a LOT of tape on components with big Sharpie marks "RIGHT SIDE!" or "LEFT SIDE" :-) (hard to do with little ears I had to get new screws for and clean up and paint! :-)

Thanks for the photo, confirms even better what mine should look like, I still need to go out and snug it up and possibly rotate a bit for 'bet fit'. I'm much happier with the Studebaker engineer in charge of the parking brake system now. :-) KNEW something had to be wrong (and, was ME)!

[bsrosell]

Oh, one interesting note, perhaps debate or correction/learning potential for me again, BUT, I had read in some posts (I TRY to research first, before bugging you guys all the time!) that you should NOT lubricate the parking brake cable and that they came "dry" from the factory, lasted many years that way, and leave them alone.

That was my plan (Leave alone), but noticed as I unwrapped the dealership tag and Stude wired-on number from it, there was obviously a 'yellowish' substance on both ends of the housing, and sticking out of the notches. And, trying to move the cable back and forth, it was VERY difficult; full of dried up lubricant!

I soaked the cable (keeping rubber boots out!) in my parts-cleaner tank, worked cable back and forth, and finished up with brake cleaner to dry out the system faster (and blew it out). Then took lithium engine assembly lube with graphite, and worked it up and down (with lube on the cable), to get it inside that "wire mesh" housing. So, I don't know why they didn't have a 'solid wall" housing (vs the permeable wire mesh); DOES seem like it's designed to "get wet and air dry", but at least THIS NOS cable was full of what sure appears to be 60 year old Lithium grease...... For what it's worth.....

[bsrosell]

Wow that Cable in Pic #2 (L/R Wheel) is WAY longer than Original!
Why does Pic. #4 look so much better? Is that just the angle of the Picture?

I have never seen one with that huge "Drip Loop" in it.
Doesn't the little "Cover" retainer with the 2 self tapping screws have a ridge on it that locks into a grove on the Cable Housing end?

Ok, simply for the benefit of anyone in the future who may miss this point( groove in "ear" plates), here is the difference in curve and LIFTING ABOVE the springs! Thanks again guys.

[altair]

There are different theories for different people. Early British cars had grease nipples on the cables and American cars did not, most of the American cars suffered from frozen rusted cables that required replacement. I would grease them.

[bsrosell]

There are different theories for different people. Early British cars had grease nipples on the cables and American cars did not, most of the American cars suffered from frozen rusted cables that required replacement. I would grease them.

Yes, I did run Lithium grease up and down the cable to get it inside. My theory on the "partially open to atmosphere" TIGHTLY bound wire housing; (no idea why, unless TO drain water that got In from the top?), but re: lube, "tis better to be lubed and not rusting, than to have some VERY tiny road DUST inside, and wear." That cable is going to rust in there before it will wear out, considering almost zero motion. (how often do YOU apply your parking brake? at least on your daily driver?? Doubt folks were TOO much more diligent back then unless on hills (like now, for me).