So, Mark, I guess that's my question: how are you compensating for the fact that a higher pedal ratio or a narrower MC will result in an increased brake pedal travel? Is the max pedal travel not utilized under the current power braking system? Are you raising the height of the pedal? Making a hole in the floor ?

__________________
"Senior Luna, your sense of humor is still loco... but we love it, anyway." -rickymay ____ "Your sense of humor is still loco... " -MBeige ____ "Señor Luna, your sense of humor is quite järjetön" -Delibes

1982 300SD -- 211k, Texas car, tranny issues ____ 1979 240D 4-speed 234k -- turbo and tuned IP, third world taxi hot rod

2 Samuel 12:13: "David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die."

Neither. the pedal travel from what I can tell is the same. It's the pivot point in relation to where the pressure (foot) is and the increased psi created. I have some charts of the increased psi created since I initially thought the whole pedal ratio was a bunch of mumbo jumbo. However, it's the leverage created. I hope that makes sense. I will get some pictures shortly. No hole in the floor either. The new pedal arm really only addresses the bends in the brake pedal arm and the relationship of the pushrod and the "U" at the end of the pushrod where it mounts to the pedal arm. One needs a flat area whereas the bends creates a non-flat surface which means the "U" part cannot mount to the pedal arm. Tom is right about changing the diameter of the MC. That's an old hotrodder trick. I think I can go with the OEM master cylinder because the MB design is really interesting. When you take apart the vacuum booster, you realize there's actually 2 pushrods, one on each side of the membrane.

Now, with a manual setup, and the plate, the pushrod actually mounts directly to the MC. The end fits inside a tube about 1" so there's no fear of the pushrod coming lose or disengaged from the MC.