Quick question,

I'm looking for a 4040 prop and have managed to source one from a non-abs ek. Is it possible to make this fit with my rear disc conversion? (90 ef)

Thanks

 

Pretty sure the mount just has to be modified. Just compare it to the one in your EF and see the differences. I got lucky and got a 4040 from an EF. I have a picture in my build thread if your interested.

 

I'm 99% sure it'll work if I modify the mounts and fit it, however I'm still unsure whether to put a 4040 on once I do the disc conversion.

I've heard mixed reviews of people saying a 4040 is better than a 3040 and others saying a 4040 will bias the braking further to the rear.

My current setup is already biased towards the rear and the rears lock up far sooner than the fronts. I'm worried the 4040 will make things worse.

 

For what it's worth, when I did a rear disc conversion using DA integra parts, I used the 4040 valve from the DA and it's been perfect.

 

problem is DAs were never imported to Malta so finding DA parts is damn near impossible :/

Thanks for the help though

 

The 3040 proportioning valve is for disc brakes up front and drums brakes in the rear. Drum brakes need to overcome the tension of the springs before the shoes contact the drums. For this reason the valve stalls the fluid from reaching the drums in order to time the drums and discs making contacting simultaneously.

If you preform a rear disk brake conversion on your car and leave the 3040 valve, the front brakes will engage first followed by the rear slightly after. Not a good braking effect.

Installing the 4040 valve, everything is equal. With properly functioning braking system and properly functioning prop valve, all four calipers sandwich the pads onto the rotors.

I don't know how much it is to ship to Malta but I have a few 4040's in my shop.

 

http://stoptech.com/technical-suppor...tioning-valves

 

That really isn't true. The prop valve depends more on what front brakes were used than anything else. 3030 were generally used on '88 - '95 Civics with front discs and rear drums, but they were also used on '92 - '95 JDM SiR Civics with EX style front calipers and rear discs, the same is true for the '93 - '97 USDM Del Sols. '92 - '95 Civics Si hatchbacks are the only thing I'm aware of that used a 3040 prop valve, small front brakes and rear discs. Integra used a 4040 prop valve due to their larger front brakes.

If you move up a little newer again you'll see the '96 - '00 Civic CX, DX (except sedan) and HX coupe all share the same prop valve as the '99 - '00 Civic Si.

OP the '96 - '00 Civic/'98 - '01 Integra style prop valve wont fit without cutting, flaring and bending brake lines. You can use a '94 - '97 Integra prop valve and swap the bracket for the Civic version if it's easier to get that. If you're keeping the small front brakes try to find a 3040.

 

Do you have references you can source for these statements?

 

Of course:

Taken from another post of mine:

And here's another list for '96 - '00 Civics/'98 - '01 Integras

 

Lol, you cannot cite yourself as a source unless you have published works backing your findings. Do you have JDM publications, service manuals, or pictures at the very least?

 

Where is the hyperlink to the original post of yours that you are citing?

 

Go to any Honda parts website and look up the prop valves if you don't believe me. Part numbers don't lie.

A good friend of mine owned a RHD JDM Civic SiR-S, that's how I know about the 3030 prop valve was used on those models.

 

I think you are confused as to how this works. I think it is safe to assume that you have never been to college.

"10 Billion people a day die behind the wheel of a Civic." This is a fact because I cite myself publishing it here on Honda Tech. This is not acceptable for a credible source.

"My good friend had one." He did not buy it new in Japan, he got it after many owners and has no idea what was originally installed on the vehicle.

Let us just assume for the moment that he did buy it new right off the factory floor in Japan. Looking at one single car to cover all the other Civics can be a dubious position to take when the part could have been installed by mistake. Human error.

Finally, not taking responsibility for your own statements you then try to shift the work onto someone else by instructing them to search for it if there is any doubt. A professor would flunk you and laugh you out of his class.

 

Fair enough. Can you A: disprove his work?
B: cite and or prove your own inaccurate information?

Please feel free to educate me. And for your information, yes I have been to college, and I've been doing this "car stuff" longer than most of our membership has been alive. I'm eagerly sitting on he edge of my seat awaiting your response.

 

A. It is not my job to disprove his work.

B. My information already has a hyperlink for citation; you clearly paid for your college degree

C. All my future responses will be towards the original person in this conversation. Thank you for playing. Parting gifts will be on your right towards the exit.

If you were smart, you would PM him with what YOU would like to ask me.

 

LOL that was cute.

If you were smart, you'd have thought twice about insulting this site's administrator.

 

 

Probably already making a new account.

 

It was a matter of time.

 

From what I'm seeing these dumb asses are just coming onto the site just to start ****, no need to name a source when the part #'s match on different generation civics. Talk about working a tuner shop but has time to post all day in the forums and ****.

 

This guy was starting **** with every senior member in the 92-00 subforum for the last couple of months. Glad he's gone...but something tells me he's made a new account already. Too bad there is no reliable way to perma-ban.

 

Wading in to the fray, here. I take issue with some of the back and forth here.

I've been to university. Have a Master's degree. Note that it is acceptable to cite previous research done by you. This is often to build on previous knowledge gained or new questions that arise via past experiments.

In this case, OptimisticWay is off-base criticizing 94EG8 for "citing himself". The list of prop valves 94EG8 provided is sourced properly (Honda parts websites); he just compiled this info and posted it, and in the case of 5G Civics, showed that the prop valve in question is found on more vehicles than just an Si hatchback with rear discs. There is little original research here; all information is easily verified with a modicum of effort. A basic understanding of how Honda part numbers "work" is necessary, however: same part number for different vehicles means the same part is installed on these vehicles.

This should be convincing enough. But OptimisticWay continues: he demands additional information from other sources, and outright refusing to verify 94EG8's statements himself even though this is very easily done and would bolster his case considerably if he could show evidence to the contrary. Some people might call this poor critical thinking skills, but it may also be borne of laziness. At this point, it is reasonable to conclude that OptimisticWay is behaving obstinately, believing himself to be right in light of strong evidence to the contrary. Classic cognitive dissonance / confirmation bias.

Admitting to being mistaken takes courage and not everyone has the intestinal fortitude to do this.

 

Thank you for the info 94EG8 and thank you Clayton for ridding us of Mr.Wiseman.

I'm still trying to sort it out though.
I am currently running stock MC (can't remember whether it's 7/8 or 15/16), ed7 front vented discs and calipers and I will be running eg2 rear discs and calipers.

As I stated before, i have the stock 3040 and although my braking is biased towards the front, the rears lock up way before the fronts do probably caused by the lightness of the rear.

I am coming to the conclusion that I probably have to do the trailing arms conversion first and see where i'm at before deciding anything about the prop.

I am also planning to add some weight to the rear in the near future via an asr subframe brace and 24mm bar however I'm unsure whether this will affect my setup.

I would really like to know your opinion. The car is mainly a fun dd nothing out of the ordinary. It has a jdm d15b swap with boltons.

Ideally, the setup I end up going for won't need cutting, flaring and bending brake lines in order to install.

Thank you in advance for your feedback.