Michael has been redoing the web site. Supposedly that stuff will reappear some day.

It's kinda slow........go ahead and ask your question!!!
I can almost guarantee the answer!!
6sally6

Well you will probably regret that lol. It's the dreaded brake pedal height question again. This is on my 67 mustang. I'm running a 67auto power brake pedal  (got to shave it down for the smaller pedal pad still. running a manual trans now) I've got Steve's brakes all 4 corners the newer gt brakes 13.2 front 13 rear a Bendix booster and 2000 gt master. I also made a custom aluminum spacer for the booster .675 thick. I measured one of the stamped steel ones to copy the thickness as I recall so hopefully that was correct .  I made the aluminum one to shore up the firewall I'm a cad cam operator/cnc machinist/toolmaker so it seemed like a simple project. So the question is do you see any reason I cant take this spacer down to .400 thick? The pedal is approximately .25 away from the pedal stop aka clutch tube. google dice roller d20 

Help me out here......(at least this will give you a bump-to-the-top).....
The spacer 'sandwiches' the firewall between the booster and pedal assembly..right?
IF it's just for reinforcement...sure is a thick piece!
I would think a thinner (and maybe a wider) piece would work better....giving you the extra .25 (or more) you are looking for.
6sally6

After you trim the brake pedal you'll want to flatten the edge where the new cut is located. Otherwise you'll have a heck of a time fitting the brake pedal pad.

I used to build and sell billet spacers like that for the bendix boosters. It keeps the firewall from deforming when the booster nuts are tightened.  A good part to have !

The ones we built were 9/16” thick. 

Any thicker and the brake pedal will sit too low.  With a brake pedal ratio of 3:1, every 1/16” of extra thickness will lower the static pedal height by 3/16”, just for example.

I do not see an issue with making it a little thinner.

But remember, if you are comparing the new, lower pedal height with the old manual brake pedal, IT IS SUPPOSED TO SIT ABOUT AN INCH LOWER WITH POWER BRAKES!

With the original manual brake pedal ratio of 6:1 vs the new ratio of 3:1, the pedal’s total travel will be about half what it used to be, so it will not go farther down than the original one, even though it starts out 1” lower.
That was an advantage to having power brakes with a quicker pedal ratio. You don’t have to lift your foot as high up to get onto the brake pedal.

So, if your concern is the power brake pedal sits 1” lower than the old manual brake pedal, that is the way the factory intended it and is no cause for concern.

You DO have the correct pedal and booster, right?

The 67-69 pedal measures 5.0” centerline of pivot to centerline of actuation pin. The booster will have the curved input shaft that bends down about 1/2” to the actuation pin. (Not straight like the 70 booster).

Note: I edited that pedal dimension to 5.0” since I originally “misremembered” it thinking it was 5.5”. Thanks BearingBob for the reminder.

Last edited by MS (2/09/2021 6:21 PM)

This is the power brake pedal I removed from my 69.

Thanks guys.  I edited my previous post with this comment on the pedal dimension:

Note: I edited that pedal dimension to 5.0” since I originally “misremembered” it thinking it was 5.5”. Thanks BearingBob for the reminder.

Somebody should make an FAQ page about pedals and boosters so I don’t have to remember all these details.  Oh... wait....   Michael, quit deleting all that stuff!!!