View Poll Results: Have your brake lines broken before?
Yes, I have a 2k-2k1, and they have previously broken
3
3.75%
Yes, I have a 2k2-2k3, and they have previously broken
2
2.50%
Yes, but I have a different gen maxima
1
1.25%
No, they have never broken
74
92.50%
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll
Have your brake lines broken before?
Have your brake lines broken before?
I am curious to know whether anyone with a 5th gen: 2k-2k1 or 2k2-2k3 has ever had their oem brake line break?
The other day I was driving at school, as I was approaching a red light I went to brake, had almost no brakes, but was able to safely stop. I looked at my front drivers side rim and it had brake fluid on it. After towing it home, it seems like the rubber line burst. Cubanato & Kloogy also have/had their 2k2 brake lines break.
Anyone else? If so, at what mileage? Please choose from one of the above poll options. thx
Nathan
The other day I was driving at school, as I was approaching a red light I went to brake, had almost no brakes, but was able to safely stop. I looked at my front drivers side rim and it had brake fluid on it. After towing it home, it seems like the rubber line burst. Cubanato & Kloogy also have/had their 2k2 brake lines break.
Anyone else? If so, at what mileage? Please choose from one of the above poll options. thx
Nathan
Just a ??? how heavy are your rims?
If you throw on big heavy rims and tires, it puts much more stress on the braking system... over time I would think the extra force needed to stop would over stress the rubber OEM lines and cause them to fail....
If I had bigger heavier rims, I would switch to SS Lines just to be safe.
If you throw on big heavy rims and tires, it puts much more stress on the braking system... over time I would think the extra force needed to stop would over stress the rubber OEM lines and cause them to fail....
If I had bigger heavier rims, I would switch to SS Lines just to be safe.
Originally Posted by Nathan
Both mine and Cubanato's rims are around 24lbs for a 19" wheel. Doesn't seem to be excessively heavy.
No its not that heavy, as a matter of fact I think the SE 17's are around 26lbs. guess thats not the cause then
ummm....probably not the lines breaking, but instead probably got some road debris of some sort kicked up into the wheel well and cut the line...it happens. The lines aren't going to break just from "braking"....
Originally Posted by upstatemax
Just a ??? how heavy are your rims?
If you throw on big heavy rims and tires, it puts much more stress on the braking system... over time I would think the extra force needed to stop would over stress the rubber OEM lines and cause them to fail....
If I had bigger heavier rims, I would switch to SS Lines just to be safe.
If you throw on big heavy rims and tires, it puts much more stress on the braking system... over time I would think the extra force needed to stop would over stress the rubber OEM lines and cause them to fail....
If I had bigger heavier rims, I would switch to SS Lines just to be safe.
mine at 112k are still good.
Originally Posted by nicks79
That makes no sense. What does wight have to do with it? I's say lighter wheel would stress suspension more, cause its takes less potential to move lighter wheel. So the acceleration on wheel movement up and down would be higher.
mine at 112k are still good.
mine at 112k are still good.
There is a great, detailed explanation of the "downside" of ss lines someplace, but I can't seem to find it....here's a paraphrase of what it says:
Originally Posted by paraphrase of what it says
One downside to using stainless braided lines is that the outer braiding is usually more wear fragile than the stock rubber hose. If the line rubs on a shock or other nearby surface, the braid may eventually wear and split open. The braid provides much of the strength of the line so when it does tear there is danger of the inner lining bulging outward, which may lead to complete failure of the line.
another one (though the link mentioned is dead):
Originally Posted by 442 forums
Stainless Steel Braided Lines/Hoses
If you go with braided stainless steel (SS) brake hoses, you should plan on replacing them every year. If you do not plan to do this annual replacement, then you should not install braided SS hoses on your car. That being said, I strongly urge you to read the following webpage on this subject:
http://www.olympiakos.com/svt-faq/node21.html.
This page explains a lot about braided SS brake hoses, which are really Teflon lines with a SS braid around the Teflon. The Teflon has advantages over rubber, but these brake lines are not bulletproof.
Here's some quotes from the above mentioned webpage:
"Here's the thing, though: Since stainless-steel lines don't bulge as they age, and since the inner Teflon lining is hidden behind the braid, there's no easy way to inspect the lines for warning signs of imminent failure."
"This is no big deal on a race car, since the lines are (or should be) replaced at least once a season. On a street car, where most people are likely to let YEARS go by without even looking at their lines, it can be an issue."
"When steel-armored hoses were run through a test, it was found that the hoses tended to bend right at the junction between the hose and the hose-ends. After a while, the stainless-steel braid would start to tear, and the broken wires would cut into the inner Teflon liner, causing it to fail."
I have seen other postings on a different car forum where people have seen this same type of failure - over time the steel braid cut through the Teflon brake line.
So, again I urge you to read that webpage, and be fully informed before you consider whether stainless steel lines are right for your car. Brakes are no place to cut corners, so if you don't want to make the commitment that SS lines require, then you should stick with rubber, IMHO.
If you go with braided stainless steel (SS) brake hoses, you should plan on replacing them every year. If you do not plan to do this annual replacement, then you should not install braided SS hoses on your car. That being said, I strongly urge you to read the following webpage on this subject:
http://www.olympiakos.com/svt-faq/node21.html.
This page explains a lot about braided SS brake hoses, which are really Teflon lines with a SS braid around the Teflon. The Teflon has advantages over rubber, but these brake lines are not bulletproof.
Here's some quotes from the above mentioned webpage:
"Here's the thing, though: Since stainless-steel lines don't bulge as they age, and since the inner Teflon lining is hidden behind the braid, there's no easy way to inspect the lines for warning signs of imminent failure."
"This is no big deal on a race car, since the lines are (or should be) replaced at least once a season. On a street car, where most people are likely to let YEARS go by without even looking at their lines, it can be an issue."
"When steel-armored hoses were run through a test, it was found that the hoses tended to bend right at the junction between the hose and the hose-ends. After a while, the stainless-steel braid would start to tear, and the broken wires would cut into the inner Teflon liner, causing it to fail."
I have seen other postings on a different car forum where people have seen this same type of failure - over time the steel braid cut through the Teflon brake line.
So, again I urge you to read that webpage, and be fully informed before you consider whether stainless steel lines are right for your car. Brakes are no place to cut corners, so if you don't want to make the commitment that SS lines require, then you should stick with rubber, IMHO.
Originally Posted by irish44j
basically, a rubber line will often have a small leak when it starts to fail, resulting in spongy pedal, air in the system, etc....but enough advance-warning to fix the problem before an accident ensues. When SS lines go bad, they do it FAST....no warning signs whatsoever.
Originally Posted by nicks79
That makes no sense. What does wight have to do with it? I's say lighter wheel would stress suspension more, cause its takes less potential to move lighter wheel. So the acceleration on wheel movement up and down would be higher.
mine at 112k are still good.
mine at 112k are still good.
You are saying I make no sense??? Wow
I respect Irish's opionion and all, however, I think many of you guys discount the effect heavy rims have on a car...
My brother is a mechanic and has been for a long time, he feels; the extra rolling mass is harder to stop, duh. This increases the temperatures your breaks get to and you have to push harder on the pedal to get the extra force to stop, increasing force. The addition of heat and force can wear down parts quicker causing higher failure rates.
Some of the rims people are throwing on have a total rim and tire mass of 10-15lbs heavier PER CORNER.... Thats like throwing 250-350lbs of weights in your car and telling me that it takes the same ammount of force to stop the car. All of you know the effects it has on acceleration, why would it not hurt breaking the same way... think about it.
Originally Posted by upstatemax
You are saying I make no sense??? Wow
I respect Irish's opionion and all, however, I think many of you guys discount the effect heavy rims have on a car...
My brother is a mechanic and has been for a long time, he feels; the extra rolling mass is harder to stop, duh. This increases the temperatures your breaks get to and you have to push harder on the pedal to get the extra force to stop, increasing force. The addition of heat and force can wear down parts quicker causing higher failure rates.
Some of the rims people are throwing on have a total rim and tire mass of 10-15lbs heavier PER CORNER.... Thats like throwing 250-350lbs of weights in your car and telling me that it takes the same ammount of force to stop the car. All of you know the effects it has on acceleration, why would it not hurt breaking the same way... think about it.
I respect Irish's opionion and all, however, I think many of you guys discount the effect heavy rims have on a car...
My brother is a mechanic and has been for a long time, he feels; the extra rolling mass is harder to stop, duh. This increases the temperatures your breaks get to and you have to push harder on the pedal to get the extra force to stop, increasing force. The addition of heat and force can wear down parts quicker causing higher failure rates.
Some of the rims people are throwing on have a total rim and tire mass of 10-15lbs heavier PER CORNER.... Thats like throwing 250-350lbs of weights in your car and telling me that it takes the same ammount of force to stop the car. All of you know the effects it has on acceleration, why would it not hurt breaking the same way... think about it.
If you have light wheels combo and heavy load in the car or no load in heavy wheels, assuming all wieghts are equal - then it takes the same amount of work for breaks to stop.
Are you saying that driving with the passanger is not good for the breaks? Of course not, but the car was designed for 5 people so it better keep up.
If you want to preserve your breaks in the best working condition, make your car as light as possible. But if you think that the weight of wheel ITSELF makes the difference - and not the total mass, then I suggest Physics 101. No offense.
Originally Posted by nicks79
Now listen to yourself. How is 15 lbs heavier wheel per corner equal to same as throwing 250-300 lbs of weights in the car? Last time I checked there is 4 wheels in my car that would equal approx. 60 lbs of extra weight.
If you have light wheels combo and heavy load in the car or no load in heavy wheels, assuming all wieghts are equal - then it takes the same amount of work for breaks to stop.
Are you saying that driving with the passanger is not good for the breaks? Of course not, but the car was designed for 5 people so it better keep up.
If you want to preserve your breaks in the best working condition, make your car as light as possible. But if you think that the weight of wheel ITSELF makes the difference - and not the total mass, then I suggest Physics 101. No offense.
If you have light wheels combo and heavy load in the car or no load in heavy wheels, assuming all wieghts are equal - then it takes the same amount of work for breaks to stop.
Are you saying that driving with the passanger is not good for the breaks? Of course not, but the car was designed for 5 people so it better keep up.
If you want to preserve your breaks in the best working condition, make your car as light as possible. But if you think that the weight of wheel ITSELF makes the difference - and not the total mass, then I suggest Physics 101. No offense.
For every pound you add to the wheels or rotors, it is like adding 6-8lbs to the car. Before you try and act smart at least know SOME of what you are talking about.
Um, hate to add to the confusion here, but there is another factor involved. Keep in mind that larger rims, even if not heavier AT ALL, will slow a car down. This is also due to the rotational mass/inertia being described above. The ratio may not be much, but yes, effect on acceleration is greater, (by at least 2:1) when reducing rotational weight vs. overall weight. What is being disregarded by nicks above, is that the farther rotational mass is from its axis, the more energy it takes to move that mass.....hence making reducing THAT weight, more effective.
The following information was borrowed from another site, found by googling for rotational mass:
I figure 1# off the wheels is about 2# off the chassis:
Notes from physics --- Kinetic Energy = 1/2 I w^2 where
I = MxR^2 ... R being the radial center of mass, w is rotational speed,
which for a 24"; tire is 1.0xspeed in ft/sec...
use slugs for M (lbs/32.17) if you want to stay in the ft/lb/sec system and
lets you easily figure out hp (550 ft.lb./sec) to spin up to a given speed in
a certain # of seconds).
I crunched some numbers for a reality check.
For my wheel tire combo (SSR 16x7 GT1 - 15# and
BS SS-03 205/60/16 24#) it would take about
6 hp to get the 4 tires spinning to 60 mph in 7 seconds
and to accelerate them linearly to 60 mph as well, and it would take a 50# combo about 9 hp to do the
same... and takes about 78 hp (average) to propell the
remaining 2500 pounds of car and driver from 0 to 60 in 7 sec.
This doesn't include extra horsies to overcome rolling friction
and air resistance.
From these numbers, 1# off at the wheel is about as good as about 2.2# off the chassis
3 hp difference for the 44# wt savings from 39# to 50# per wheel, compared with
3 hp difference for 96# at the chassis. 78hp for 2500# chassis vs 81 hp for 2596#
chassis to do the same 7 second 0-60.
Some approximations were used (like the precise location of R).
Your results may vary.
Hope this helps!
J
The following information was borrowed from another site, found by googling for rotational mass:
I figure 1# off the wheels is about 2# off the chassis:
Notes from physics --- Kinetic Energy = 1/2 I w^2 where
I = MxR^2 ... R being the radial center of mass, w is rotational speed,
which for a 24"; tire is 1.0xspeed in ft/sec...
use slugs for M (lbs/32.17) if you want to stay in the ft/lb/sec system and
lets you easily figure out hp (550 ft.lb./sec) to spin up to a given speed in
a certain # of seconds).
I crunched some numbers for a reality check.
For my wheel tire combo (SSR 16x7 GT1 - 15# and
BS SS-03 205/60/16 24#) it would take about
6 hp to get the 4 tires spinning to 60 mph in 7 seconds
and to accelerate them linearly to 60 mph as well, and it would take a 50# combo about 9 hp to do the
same... and takes about 78 hp (average) to propell the
remaining 2500 pounds of car and driver from 0 to 60 in 7 sec.
This doesn't include extra horsies to overcome rolling friction
and air resistance.
From these numbers, 1# off at the wheel is about as good as about 2.2# off the chassis
3 hp difference for the 44# wt savings from 39# to 50# per wheel, compared with
3 hp difference for 96# at the chassis. 78hp for 2500# chassis vs 81 hp for 2596#
chassis to do the same 7 second 0-60.
Some approximations were used (like the precise location of R).
Your results may vary.
Hope this helps!
J
75k and no problems with my OEM rubber hoses.
Nick & UpstateMax...is the debacle based on a car with OEM brake system or no? With the brake effect, has the speed of the vehicle placed into the equation as a variable for stopping?
Nick & UpstateMax...is the debacle based on a car with OEM brake system or no? With the brake effect, has the speed of the vehicle placed into the equation as a variable for stopping?
Joo wanna play??......ok we go to war
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,274
You know whats sucks even more.....the bolt where the rubber hose connects tothe rubber hose stripped on me yesterday while i was tyring to get it of.....im hoping tonight i can get it off with some vise grips. This maxima had been nothing but problems and i still can't even take my car to the movies cuz of teh damn headlights
-J
-J
i had 120,000 miles on my 2K and i didnt drive it easy by any means...ABS kicked in a LOT for how heavy i Braked at times. The car was flawless and it stopped on a dime. never had any break line problems. My 2K2 with 36K also has no problems.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I voted no. I have heard about this problem and with 81,000 miles on the car I didn't want to wait till something happened. So I swapped out my rubber lines for some stainless steel lines. Better safe then sorry. 
I still have my old rubber ones if anyone has a dead wish...
I still have my old rubber ones if anyone has a dead wish...
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 51
I voted no... I haven't heard of this problem on Maxs. However, I did have a brake line break on an old Honda of mine. There was lots of warning... spongy brakes, rotor creaking noises... that's what lead me to pump the brakes in my driveway when I broke one front brake line hose... after that, I replaced all four. It seems a little early for our Maxs to have problems with brake hoses... do you possibly have enemies or Maxima envious/jealous neighbors?
Originally Posted by nicks79
Prove it...
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 161
Not to get off subject, but I did get heavily interested in the '6-8 lb reduction' when I thought about the possible effect this could have on accelleration and handling. I found many claims of the 6-8 lb reduction per lb of wheel weight, but no calculations...
I did find this link in the Audi World forums regarding rotational inertia - it's alot of math, but I couldn't find any errors. I'm not saying it's right, but it's about all I've found with something detailed behind it.
http://forums.audiworld.com/s4/msgs/1032814.phtml
I did find this link in the Audi World forums regarding rotational inertia - it's alot of math, but I couldn't find any errors. I'm not saying it's right, but it's about all I've found with something detailed behind it.
http://forums.audiworld.com/s4/msgs/1032814.phtml
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 277
Originally Posted by Nathan
I am curious to know whether anyone with a 5th gen: 2k-2k1 or 2k2-2k3 has ever had their oem brake line break?
The other day I was driving at school, as I was approaching a red light I went to brake, had almost no brakes, but was able to safely stop. I looked at my front drivers side rim and it had brake fluid on it. After towing it home, it seems like the rubber line burst. Cubanato & Kloogy also have/had their 2k2 brake lines break.
Anyone else? If so, at what mileage? Please choose from one of the above poll options. thx
Nathan
The other day I was driving at school, as I was approaching a red light I went to brake, had almost no brakes, but was able to safely stop. I looked at my front drivers side rim and it had brake fluid on it. After towing it home, it seems like the rubber line burst. Cubanato & Kloogy also have/had their 2k2 brake lines break.
Anyone else? If so, at what mileage? Please choose from one of the above poll options. thx
Nathan
yup, turns out the brake line bracket (on the strut) was not connected properly and the rubber line rubbed on the strut and blew...scared the **** out of me...lol
Originally Posted by k2max_driver
My SS rear lines both went out when they rubbed on my sway bar bolts. replace them with stock ones but i seem to have no problem with the fronts
Either way though I hate the way my brakes feel and I would still get ss lines just to get rid of the spongy pedal
I had a S/S line fail on me. But it was due to improper mounting and the lne was resting on a portion of the rotor that heated through the SS eventually wearinig it out. Luckily it busted while I was working on my car in the garage.
Originally Posted by maxS
why bother with oem lines. replace them with these:
i have 3 maxima's, 02 se wtih 50k miles, never broken a brake line, my black 98 with 117k miles never broken a brake line, my 98 5spd with 182,000 miles has never broken a brake line either, as well we have 4 other maximas in the family, a 91 which has the original oem lines, another 02 and 03 which all have original lines, and a 01 which has the originals too. could be a one off problem, ive never experienced it myself, someone could have twisted the brake line when they were doing the brakes or damaged the line and weakened it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by foodmanry
Go back and read Irish's post. It actually makes me think twice about my S/S brake lines...especially after I had one fail already (due to operator error...woops!)
Originally Posted by Mass_Media
Makes me kind worried about my ss brake lines. They are only a few months old i guess i will just have to make sure i replace them every year or so.
You're kidding, Right? SS lines will last you a lifetime.
This guys brake line failure was probably due to him or someone twisting the line when they reinstalled the brake caliper. It's an easy thing to overlook when doing your brakes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
litch
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
123
Jan 4, 2024 07:01 PM
My Coffee
New Member Introductions
15
Jun 6, 2017 02:01 PM
HerpDerp1919
3rd Generation Maxima (1989-1994)
2
Sep 29, 2015 02:02 PM