Does brake fluid have a shelf life?

Steve wrote:
>
> Mortimer wrote:
>
> > Well if you keep each of your cars to the point that they are only fit for
> > scrap, then that's fair enough.
>
> That's the whole point. He's got a 90s vehicle waiting for the
> scrapyard, but I'd be willing to jump in my 60s vehicle and drive from
> Texas to San Diego tomorrow if I had to

Yeah but your fantasy trip thru Arizona ignores the reality that the person you
are responding to has to live with. If you had been driving your 60's vehicle at
this time of year in the salt and slush of Chicago it would be falling apart
from rust. The point being made is that if the car has a limited and predictable
life span due to external rust there is little point in worrying about internal
corrosion that will not eat the car as fast as the external corrosion will.

-jim

Steve wrote:
>
> If run-it-till-it-dies is your plan, that's fine. But don't go
> dispensing "wisdom" about how you never need to flush brake fluid or
> coolant to other people based on your mode of operation! I saw your
> list of clunkers, and they rarely lasted 8 years. My daily driver is 43
> years old this model year. We just retired my wife's car at 16 model
> years old. Your plan certainly doesn't apply to me. Granted, I'm at the
> *other* end of the bell curve from you, but even the people within 1
> standard deviation of the mean- ie those who will keep a car for
> somewhere between 3 and 10 years and then sell it for a lot more than
> scrap value- need to take care of their cars better than what you are
> recommending in order to avoid throwing away money.
>
>

43 years old, not bad. How about a front line fire engine that is at the
46 year old mark?

Still looks and runs like new. BUT it's got a VERY small cab, Hard to
fit behind the wheel in full turnout gear.
Our newest rig is a 94.

Personal vehicle currently on the road are much newer but only because
they were good deals when we bought them.
ones a 97 with 178,000 and the other is an 02 with 143,000 on it.
The 95 Conversion van is parked for the winter, it's a former Florida
vehicle and now has serious rust that will get repaired this coming
year. Unless I find a 96 up in good shape.

Last vehicle I retired was a 94 with 188,000. It will be used as a drill
vehicle for the department prior to being scrapped. The only things
really wrong with it are a cracked exhaust manifold and it needs brake
lines (again) both thanks to salt. Body wise it's in good shape other
than needing one lower quarter panel.

--
Steve W.

jim wrote:
>
> Steve wrote:
>> Mortimer wrote:
>>
>>> Well if you keep each of your cars to the point that they are only fit for
>>> scrap, then that's fair enough.
>> That's the whole point. He's got a 90s vehicle waiting for the
>> scrapyard, but I'd be willing to jump in my 60s vehicle and drive from
>> Texas to San Diego tomorrow if I had to
>
> Yeah but your fantasy trip thru Arizona ignores the reality that the person you
> are responding to has to live with. If you had been driving your 60's vehicle at
> this time of year in the salt and slush of Chicago it would be falling apart
> from rust. The point being made is that if the car has a limited and predictable
> life span due to external rust there is little point in worrying about internal
> corrosion that will not eat the car as fast as the external corrosion will.
>
> -jim

That may be a valid point. Its not the point as it has been stated up
until now in this thread.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:21:25 -0600, Steve > wrote:


>
>You don't get it, do you?
>
>If run-it-till-it-dies is your plan, that's fine. But don't go
>dispensing "wisdom" about how you never need to flush brake fluid or
>coolant to other people based on your mode of operation! I saw your
>list of clunkers, and they rarely lasted 8 years. My daily driver is 43
>years old this model year. We just retired my wife's car at 16 model
>years old. Your plan certainly doesn't apply to me. Granted, I'm at the
>*other* end of the bell curve from you, but even the people within 1
>standard deviation of the mean- ie those who will keep a car for
>somewhere between 3 and 10 years and then sell it for a lot more than
>scrap value- need to take care of their cars better than what you are
>recommending in order to avoid throwing away money.
>
These little "chats" always get distorted. I may be guilty myself.
I have never dispensed any "wisdom" about scheduled maintenance, and
always keep my vehicles maintained until they are bound for the
scrapyard anyway.
Before the '97 Lumina, my main car was an '88 Celebrity, and though it
had 190k miles (160k I put on it) I would drive it anywhere without
worry at the drop of a hat. But it was rusted out, so I scrapped it,
running like a top.
The Corsica never even goes on the highway. It goes to local stores,
and is useful for that only. I do find it amusing that it keeps
chugging along despite my neglect.
My real point was about what I think is some bull**** about flushing
brake systems.
And I conceded that if it is scheduled maintenance for your car, do
it. As far as I know GM doesn't have it as a scheduled item, though I
see plenty of GM dealers advertising $79.95 flushes.
And I actually have no problem with anybody doing any kind of even
excessive preventative maintenance if it makes them happy. Hell, I
rebuilt my 352 because I didn't like the look of the oil.
And I take all your descriptions of brake component corrosion
seriously.
Personally, I'd R&R all brake system components on a schedule instead
of messing with fluid flushes - if my cars lasted that long.
Now, on reflection, and knowing you have more experience than me,
and aside from the issue of factory recommended schedules, I'll agree
with the brake system flushes on the condition that the more modern
brake system components would make that cost effective.
IOW, R&R is very expensive
It hasn't been with my cars, but could be on others.

--Vic

On Dec 16, 12:52*pm, Vic Smith >
wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:21:25 -0600, Steve > wrote:
>
> >You don't get it, do you?
>
> >If run-it-till-it-dies is your plan, that's fine. But don't go
> >dispensing "wisdom" about how you never need to flush brake fluid or
> >coolant to other people based on your mode of operation! *I saw your
> >list of clunkers, and they rarely lasted 8 years. My daily driver is 43
> >years old this model year. We just retired my wife's car at 16 model
> >years old. Your plan certainly doesn't apply to me. Granted, I'm at the
> >*other* end of the bell curve from you, but even the people within 1
> >standard deviation of the mean- ie those who will keep a car for
> >somewhere between 3 and 10 years and then sell it for a lot more than
> >scrap value- *need to take care of their cars better than what you are
> >recommending in order to avoid throwing away money.
>
> These little "chats" always get distorted. *I may be guilty myself.
> I have never dispensed any "wisdom" about scheduled maintenance, and
> always keep my vehicles maintained until they are bound for the
> scrapyard anyway.
> Before the '97 Lumina, my main car was an '88 Celebrity, and though it
> had 190k miles (160k I put on it) I would drive it anywhere without
> worry at the drop of a hat. *But it was rusted out, so I scrapped it,
> running like a top.
> The Corsica never even goes on the highway. *It goes to local stores,
> and is useful for that only. *I do find it amusing that it keeps
> chugging along despite my neglect.
> My real point was about what I think is some bull**** about flushing
> brake systems.
> And I conceded that if it is scheduled maintenance for your car, do
> it. *As far as I know GM doesn't have it as a scheduled item, though I
> see plenty of GM dealers advertising $79.95 flushes.
> And I actually have no problem with anybody doing any kind of even
> excessive preventative maintenance if it makes them happy. *Hell, I
> rebuilt my 352 because I didn't like the look of the oil.
> And I take all your descriptions of brake component corrosion
> seriously.
> Personally, I'd R&R all brake system components on a schedule instead
> of messing with fluid flushes - if my cars lasted that long.
> Now, on reflection, and knowing you have more experience than me,
> and aside from the issue of factory recommended schedules, I'll agree
> with the brake system flushes on the condition that the more modern
> brake system components would make that cost effective.
> IOW, R&R is very expensive
> It hasn't been with my cars, but could be on others.
>
> --Vic- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

when you change brakepads/shoes/ it's a good idea to open the bleeder
and not push dirty fluide back up the line, that is the perfect time
to let some more fluid bleed out and replace it...


yeah you can leave the coolant in there, I did that, and I found it's
a lot more work to change out a rusted radiator and heater core than
it is to change the coolant every few years...

Mark

> My real point was about what I think is some bull**** about flushing
> brake systems.
> And I conceded that if it is scheduled maintenance for your car, do
> it. As far as I know GM doesn't have it as a scheduled item, though I
> see plenty of GM dealers advertising $79.95 flushes.
> It hasn't been with my cars, but could be on others.
>
> --Vic
>

Actually it is in the service manuals.

GM doesn't list a full system flush/fill, however they do state that if
you change ANY hard part (line, caliper, wheel cylinder, ABS module,
master cylinder) that you use new fluid and flush/bleed until you see
new fluid.

Ford says need to flush and change fluid varies depending on the area of
the country (no moisture problem in Arizona but there is in Florida),
and also on the robustness (corrosion resistance) of the parts in the
brake system.
Ford's service life for brake fluid is 10 years, 150,000 miles in an
undisturbed system.

Chrysler depends on which platform and brake system you have. They have
different intervals.

Most of them also spec DOT 3 fluid, Why not DOT4? Because DOT 4 absorbs
moisture at a faster rate then DOT 3.


--
Steve W.

"Vic Smith" > wrote in message
> You have absolutely no need to worry about that..
>
> --Vic

You got that right!!

wrote:
> On Dec 16, 12:52 pm, Vic Smith >
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:21:25 -0600, Steve > wrote:
>>
>>> You don't get it, do you?
>>> If run-it-till-it-dies is your plan, that's fine. But don't go
>>> dispensing "wisdom" about how you never need to flush brake fluid or
>>> coolant to other people based on your mode of operation! I saw your
>>> list of clunkers, and they rarely lasted 8 years. My daily driver is 43
>>> years old this model year. We just retired my wife's car at 16 model
>>> years old. Your plan certainly doesn't apply to me. Granted, I'm at the
>>> *other* end of the bell curve from you, but even the people within 1
>>> standard deviation of the mean- ie those who will keep a car for
>>> somewhere between 3 and 10 years and then sell it for a lot more than
>>> scrap value- need to take care of their cars better than what you are
>>> recommending in order to avoid throwing away money.
>> These little "chats" always get distorted. I may be guilty myself.
>> I have never dispensed any "wisdom" about scheduled maintenance, and
>> always keep my vehicles maintained until they are bound for the
>> scrapyard anyway.
>> Before the '97 Lumina, my main car was an '88 Celebrity, and though it
>> had 190k miles (160k I put on it) I would drive it anywhere without
>> worry at the drop of a hat. But it was rusted out, so I scrapped it,
>> running like a top.
>> The Corsica never even goes on the highway. It goes to local stores,
>> and is useful for that only. I do find it amusing that it keeps
>> chugging along despite my neglect.
>> My real point was about what I think is some bull**** about flushing
>> brake systems.
>> And I conceded that if it is scheduled maintenance for your car, do
>> it. As far as I know GM doesn't have it as a scheduled item, though I
>> see plenty of GM dealers advertising $79.95 flushes.
>> And I actually have no problem with anybody doing any kind of even
>> excessive preventative maintenance if it makes them happy. Hell, I
>> rebuilt my 352 because I didn't like the look of the oil.
>> And I take all your descriptions of brake component corrosion
>> seriously.
>> Personally, I'd R&R all brake system components on a schedule instead
>> of messing with fluid flushes - if my cars lasted that long.
>> Now, on reflection, and knowing you have more experience than me,
>> and aside from the issue of factory recommended schedules, I'll agree
>> with the brake system flushes on the condition that the more modern
>> brake system components would make that cost effective.
>> IOW, R&R is very expensive
>> It hasn't been with my cars, but could be on others.
>>
>> --Vic- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> when you change brakepads/shoes/ it's a good idea to open the bleeder
> and not push dirty fluide back up the line, that is the perfect time
> to let some more fluid bleed out and replace it...

It's not just a good idea; I believe that this is recommended procedure
for any ABS-equipped vehicle. Hose debris in the HCU = badness. Even
if you don't bleed, crack the bleeders to push the pistons back, and top
up the master cylinder when you're done.

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Dec 15, 7:47*am, Vic Smith > wrote:

> Oh hell, I never touched the brake fluid on my '88 Celebrity in the 14
> years it was in there.
> Never had any indication it was affected.
> Same with my current cars, one a '90 and the other a '97.
> Never touched the fluid.
> These are closed systems.
>
> --Vic

didn't you ever do a brake job on it in 14 years?

On Dec 15, 12:32*pm, Vic Smith >
wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:59:16 -0500, "Steve W." >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Vic Smith wrote:
> >> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:15:11 -0500, Nate Nagel >
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> metspitzer wrote:
> >>>> I found some at a relative's house that may be 15 years old.
> >>>> It is in a can with a screw off top. *I didn't notice the brand.
> >>> If it is a metal can and has an airtight seal, it is probably OK.
> >>> However if the seal has been compromised in any way it is likely full of
> >>> moisture and only good for paint stripper. *Personally I would not use
> >>> it. *If it has ever been opened and partially used, it is definitely
> >>> trash. *DOT 3/4 brake fluid is highly hygroscopic, this is why you
> >>> should change it every couple of years.
>
> >> Oh hell, I never touched the brake fluid on my '88 Celebrity in the 14
> >> years it was in there.
> >> Never had any indication it was affected.
> >> Same with my current cars, one a '90 and the other a '97.
> >> Never touched the fluid.
> >> These are closed systems.
>
> >> --Vic
>
> >NO your brakes are NOT a closed system.
> >The newer units are better at keeping air out than they used to be but
> >they still let air in. Is the brake fluid in your vehicles still crystal
> >clear? That is the color of good fluid with no moisture. ANY other color
> >is moisture and rust. Care to guess what effect that rust has on the
> >rubber seals and pistons in the system, how about what it does to the
> >passages in an ABS system.
>
> >And YES Brake fluid is listed as a service item in many vehicles owners
> >manuals and service books.
>
> Fine, do the service.
> I don't know what color my brake fluid is. *I NEVER look at it.
> Well, maybe every 5 years or so, just for the hell of it because I'm
> out of beer. *By then I can't see colors anyway.
> Doesn't matter anyway. *Just like engine oil gets colored right after
> a change, so does brake fluid as it immediately picks up color from
> rubber lines/seals. *Doesn't mean anything.
> I don't even take the MC cap off when I squeeze calipers.
> Now, how about clueing me in about how air/moisture gets in the
> system. *Not a horse**** system with leaks, but a perfectly
> functioning system.
> I've done maybe 50 brake jobs and never messed with brake fluid unless
> I broke a line to replace a cylinder. *And even then I just add what I
> need to bleed.
> Only way changing brake fluid would be a concern to me is if I was
> always excessively heating my brakes. *I don't.
> But like I said, I don't tell anybody else not to do it.
> They can change the air in their tires while they're at it.
> Again, all my cars are common GM's. *If somebody tells me Fords or
> Hondas or whatever are different, I'll listen.
>
> --Vic- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

another question might be where you live. brake fluid is going to get
wet faster on the coast than in phoenix.