FSK Over FM Transceivers

While there exist numerous Software Defined Radio (SDR) devices, they are best for receive and not transmit. Many SDR’s, such as the various RTL2832U devices (RTL-SDR, etc.) and AirSpy HF, do not transmit at all, while others (HackRF, USRP, LimeSDR), transmit at rates not much higher than 10mW. As a result, many different SDR’s do not transmit at a power level sufficient to achieve decent longer-range communications. While higher-power amplifiers exist, they often suffer one of several issues with SDRs:

  1. Many amplifiers require higher input power levels than can be provided from the <10mW inputs that SDR’s provide.
  2. There isn’t enough output filtering on these broadband SDR’s, so using them at higher power levels leads to excessive out-of-band interference. As a result, output filtering is required.
  3. Many of these amplifiers are expensive, at least compared to the costs of a lot of the Chinese-brand FM transceivers.
  4. The amplifiers that do exist, often transmit at only a few watts.

There do exist, however, a large number of affordable Chinese-made FM transceivers that can transmit up to 50W. An example is the TYT TH-9800, which can transmit on 70cm, 2m, 6m, and 10m, costing around $200-$220. Such a device allows for significant power range not only on predominantly Line-of-Sight bands like 2m and 70cm, but also on 6m (popular with sporadic-E DX), and 10m (upper HF).

Currently, the main way to communicate data over FM transceivers is via AFSK, a technique which dates back at least to the 1970s, using audio tones to encode data over FM at rates of up to 1200bps. While this method has been successfully used in e.g. APRS, it’s a non-optimal way to encode data for these usages. Better modulation techniques can allow higher data rates, more sensitivity, or a combination of the two.

David Rowe performed some investigations into this. Through simulation, he observed that he could get better data rates (2400bps) using a Manchester-encoded signal received by an FM demodulator (also see https://www.rowetel.com/?p=4663 and https://www.rowetel.com/?p=5219. His observations:

  1. DC balance is essential, otherwise the DC block in the audio will block it. He used Manchester encoding to deal with this issue, although whitening might be a more efficient way to achieve the necessary DC balance.
  2. FM demodulators work best when the frequency deviation is highest. As a result, his experiments with 4-FSK showed worse Eb/N0 than 2-FSK.
  3. The Manchester-coded 2-FSK generally does work well, with sensitivity performance approaching FM when using codec2 to encode the voice.

I’d like to study this further from the perspective of using the FM radio for transmit, and a low-cost SDR for the receive. In particular, I’d like to look at:

  1. Can the “idle” FM carrier be used to encode the data (this was mentioned in one of his comments)? What kind of DC-balanced coding schemes are good here?
  2. Does data whitening work well here as a more-efficient alternative to Manchester Encoding? If yes, then the datarate could be increased to 4800bps.
  3. Can 4-FSK be made to work better if the decoding is done using an SDR?
  4. Can slow, narrow-bandwidth FSK modes be implemented somehow that still pass through the low-pass filtering/DC block of the audio input? Perhaps this involves “mirroring” low-amplitude tones between both “sides” of the FM deviation?
  5. What other sorts of constant-envelope modulations can be done (CSS, MSK, etc.)?

We’ll see. There’s some potentially-interesting uses for this, but time will tell if I ever get around to studying this.

My TAPR DCC 2018 Paper/Presentation

Since it’s not yet up on TAPR’s site, I’ll post it here as well. When they’re put up on TAPR’s site, I’ll post the links there as well. Also, there should eventually a video of the talks.


Semtech’s LoRa transceiver products, based off Chirp Spread Spectrum (CSS) modulation, provide high receive sensitivity for low-power, Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices. While Semtech’s LoRa transceivers are designed to provide Line-of-Sight (LoS) ranges of several miles with modest radio hardware (i.e., small duck antennas, and 25-100mW Tx power levels), the high receive sensitivity (up to -138dBm or more) of a LoRa transceiver allows for leveraging common VHF+ DX techniques to achieve ranges beyond radio line-of-sight. By using higher power levels (5W/37dBm or more), high gain antennas (14.8dBi base station Yagi, 12.4dBi mobile Yagi), and horizontal polarization, it is possible to achieve Beyond Line-of-Sight (BLoS) packet radio communications using LoRa on the 70cm band. This paper will discuss digital communications using the LoRa waveform, how BLoS communication is achieved at VHF+ frequencies, the experimental setup used in this paper, and the real-world test results. To the best of the author’s knowledge, the 218km LoRa ground-based LoRa communications distance discussed in this paper is the longest ground-based (ground station-to-ground station) LoRa communication on record.

Link to presentation: TAPR 2018 — Dan Fay KG5VBY

Link to paper: Dan Fay — LoRa BLoS TAPR DCC 2018


HopeRF Breakout Board

So I decided to try my hand at making a simple PCB, with the goal of eventually developing some more complicated boards. For my board, I decided to modify this Adafruit design. The original Adafruit design is a breakout board that contains a HopeRF 69/95/98 RF module, along with a 5V->3.3V regulator and 5V->3.3V level shifters. Since the LoRa design I am currently working on operates at 3.3V, I decided to modify the design to remove the level shifters and regulator so that the board is simply a “breakout board”. Having this breakout board allows me to attach header pins to the board so that I can plug it into a breadboard.

Designing (actually modifying) the Board

So…to start, I downloaded the Eagle files provided by Adafruit, and imported them into KiCAD. The project imported without issue. I removed the regulator and level shifter from the schematic to get the simplified schematic below.

Breakout SchematicIt winds up being a pretty simple schematic, which is great for me just trying to understand the process of getting a PCB made. To get the final layout, I had to simplify/redo the traces, and wound up with the below layout (the left image is the top of the board and the right image is bottom of the board).

And just for fun, KiCAD provides a 3D rendering of your board. There’s a “regular” rendering:

Non-Raytraced Rendering

and nicer-but slower ray-traced rendering:

Raytraced Rendering

Getting the Board Made

What now? PCB houses take a series of plotter files, typically called “Gerber” files, to describe the board. These plotter files describe different components of the board, such as the copper layers, the silkscreen (i.e., the printed letters and graphics), and the soldermask (where the top and bottom of the board shouldn’t have the final insulating epoxy coating). There’s also a drill file, which describes where and what size to drill the different holes in the PCB.

I decided to have PCBWay do the fabrication. The main deciding factors were cost (a run of 10 simple boards can be fabricated for $11 including shipping and payment processing fees), a site that appeared friendly to Makers/DIY/amateurs, and decent reviews for them on the Internet. Getting the board fabricated from them was fairly straightforward: I uploaded a zip file containing the Gerbers and the drill file and put in my shipping address and payment information. They claimed to do some verification of the design to make sure it met their design rules, and once that was done, they began fabricating the board.

Roughly two weeks later (I paid an extra dollar for ePacket shipping, bringing my total up to $12), I received my boards.

Looking more closely at an individual board, the results look pretty good. The traces and silkscreening are clean, and the pads/vias are well-defined. Note that, however, the pads are somewhat uneven. While this isn’t an issue for what I’m doing, it might cause issues with other designs.


Final Assembly

Now it’s time to make it into a usable breakout board! Step one: solder header pins. I find it easier to get the pins straight if I put them in a solderless breadboard first.


Step two: solder the HopeRF module to the PCB.


All done! While my castellated-hole soldering game could use some work, the connections tested out good. Now, it’s time to integrate it into my LoRa mesh network node prototype:



Below are links to the KiCAD project and the final Gerbers sent to PCBWay.

KiCAD Files

Gerbers, as sent to PCBWay

PCB Design Fun with KiCAD

So…I’ve been working on a LoRa-based mesh network using a synchronized flooded mesh protocol (I’ll go into more details about it in a future post). This is a board design I’ve been working on to implement. It’s a two-sided board that’s exactly 100mm x 100mm (this is the largest size that PCBWay will do for $5 for 10 boards). KiCAD, BTW, is a FOSS PCB design tool. So far I’ve been pretty happy with it for designing at least simple PCBs.

Key Components:

  1. STM32 “Blue Pill” board (two rows of horizontal pins) — the brains of this operation.
  2. 16×2 LCD Display — provides a basic text output while the thing’s running.
  3. 6 LEDs — Most likely will be used to provide live activity like packet Rx/Tx, and hop count.
  4. HopeRF 98W (vertical rows of pads on center-right) — the LoRa module. Only provides a maximum power output of 20dBm, but that should be adequate for mesh node testing.
  5. Linear voltage regulator (lower left) — converts 5V to 3.3V for most of the electronics.
  6. I2C EEPROM (Upper right 8-pin DIP) — nonvolatile storage of settings and statistics.

Renderings of the Board in KiCAD

A 3D rendering of the what the board would look like:


Another BLoS LoRa Test

In preparation for presenting at ARRL/TAPR’s DCC in two weeks, I did another Socorro-area run today to get some test results using the 25w transmit power and the double-stacked halo antenna. The results aren’t particularly surprising: the added link budget enabled by the higher transmit power allows for receiving from more locations.

Below are some pictures from the test run. The first picture is of my helpers:


A picture of the horizon where I believe there’s troposcatter-based propagation:


A picture of the double-stack halo antenna that was used to get the mobile results:


Is LoRa Well-Suited for Flooded Mesh Networking?

Check out this paper, because it suggests that the answer is “yes”:

Multi-Hop LoRa Networks Enabled by Concurrent Transmission

I’ve been starting to explore the idea of developing a LoRa-based synchronized, flooded mesh network. What makes a synchronized, flooded network appealing over other types of mesh networks?

  1. Flooded mesh network nodes can be “dumb” in the sense that each node needs only to re-transmit a frame it sees. There’s no need for building routing tables or even having any comprehension whatsoever of what nodes are around you. All you do is, if you hear a packet, you re-transmit it. As a result, it’s easy for stations to quickly join and leave the mesh network.
  2. Synchronized, flooded networks should be well-suited for real-time traffic, like voice. Combined with a low datarate vocoder like Codec2 (Codec2 supports bit rates as low as 700bps), a synchronized, flooded, LoRa-based mesh network using Codec2 should be possible.

If you combine #1 and #2, you can see how this might serve as a good replacement for analog VHF/UHF FM voice in amateur radio. A simple, easy-to-join/leave mesh network that’s well-suited for voice-quality audio can provide the simplicity of analog FM voice with the improved coverage that a mesh network provides. Repeaters are simpler, too: instead of needing two separated antennas or a costly, bulky cavity duplexer, the repeater can just be another ordinary radio with perhaps a better antenna and/or more transmit power.

A known problem with flooded mesh networks are collisions: when a set of “flooded” nodes re-transmits, the nodes all collide with each other and can interfere. A synchronized flooded mesh attempts to mitigate this issue by having all nodes re-transmit at exactly the same time. If synchronized precisely enough, the combined transmits look like multi-path waves. While multi-path often results in fading, in some cases techniques such as antenna diversity and advanced signal processing can use multi-path advantageously.

The above paper is exciting because it shows that LoRa is resistant to many of the issues facing synchronized flooded mesh networks. The paper shows that in general, the capture effect enjoyed by frequency-modulated signals occurs with LoRa, where the receiver naturally locks onto the strongest signal it hears. Another finding of the paper is that the re-transmitting nodes need not be closely synchronized; in fact, performance improves if the nodes do not re-transmit at exactly the same time. This fact makes implementation a lot easier, as timing inaccuracies are actually a Good Thing(TM).


Review of the BTech AMP-U25D Amplifier


The BTech AMP-U25D is an affordable amplifier for increasing the power output of both lower-power analog and digital communications. It offers good performance and reasonable efficiency (40-50%). A surprising and exciting result is that the amplifier outputs 25w with a 1w input, which enables the amplifier to amplify common 1w packet radio modules.


Starting this spring (roughly March 2018), BTech (a US company that’s a major importer of Baofeng radios) began shipping a power amplifier for 2m, 1.25m, and 70cm Handheld Transceivers (HT’s). The ostensible purpose of this amplifier is to allow an HT to function as a substitute for a mobile rig. To this effect, the amplifier provides features making it behave like a mobile rig, such as providing a microphone port and having a 4W speaker on the unit. The overall product line purports to take a 2-6w signal from an HT and amplify it to 30-40w. All of the amplifiers are designed for constant-envelope modulation schemes like analog FM and digital FSK.
There are five different variants of the BTech AMP series. Different models support different key frequency bands — 2m, 1.25m, and 70cm. Moreover, the 2m and 70cm amplifiers come in two versions, one version designed for non-TDMA frequency-based modulation standards, and another amplifier designed to support Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA)-based standards like DMR. The TDMA-friendly amplifiers are designed to rapidly switch on and off in response to the fast on/off cycling inherent to TDMA.
While these amplifiers are marketed to boost the transmit power of HT’s and make them work like a mobile rig, they also have a lot of potential for boosting the power of different IoT-oriented packet radio devices. Generally, low bitrate packet radio devices operating in the 70cm band use some sort of frequency-modulated, constant-envelope scheme like FSK or LoRa. As a result, they should be well-suited for amplification with these amplifiers. IoT packet radio systems also need to be able to switch quickly from transmitting a packet to receiving packets. As a result, the TDMA-friendly amplifier is likely the best choice for amplifying these transceivers.
Reviewed in this post is one model of the BTech AMP series, the AMP-U25D. The AMP-U25D is the 70cm model that supports TDMA. This particular model was chosen because I intend to use this amplifier to boost the transmit power of a LoRa transceiver running at 433MHz.


First, let’s start with the unboxing! First, I tried ordering it from Amazon. The first time, they sent me the 2m version, and then, when I tried to reorder the amplifier, the page no longer existed. After that, I successfully ordered it off of BTech’s website for $104.89.
There’s definitely some ambiguity as to what the actual power output of this amplifier is, as the different unboxing photos show. Besides that, the materials supplied are fairly straightforward. There’s the amplifier, at push-to-talk speaker/microphone, and some cables.

Measuring Power Output

Next, I attempt to measure the output power of the amplifier. With the medium power setting of the Baofeng F8HP HT, it’s apparently outputting around 35w.


At the F8HP’s low output (roughly 1W), the amplifier outputs approximately 25w. This is actually a really exciting result, as there are many packet radio modules made by companies such as HopeRF that can output at a maximum of 1w. As a result, this amplifier can be used by 1w RF modules to boost their output to 25w.

Power Consumption

Next, it’s time to measure the power consumption of the amplifier. For all of these tests, the amplifier is being fed 13.8V. For the low power result (roughly 1w in, roughly 25w out), the amplifier pulls 4.45A of current, or 61.41w. For the medium power result (roughly 4w in, roughly 35w out), the amplifier consumes 5.31A, or 73.28w. Efficiency-wise, the amplifier is approximately 41% efficient when 1w is fed into it, and approximately 48% efficient when 4w is fed into it. This result suggests that sub-2w inputs take the amplifier out of saturation and into a more linear region. Potentially-interesting future work would be to study this amplifier’s output when fed with sub-1w inputs, and also to characterize the amplifier’s linearity when sub-2w inputs are fed into it.

Using the AMP-U25D with Packet Radio

Fed with a 1w input, the AMP-U25D was used to set the ground-based LoRa distance record, with the AMP-U25D being used to amplify the base station’s power output. The photo on the left shows the amplifier setup inside the case. The photo on the right shows the skin temperature after a full day of transmitting while sitting on the top of the roof of the patio of my house during an Albuquerque, NM summer afternoon/evening.





Long Distance LoRa: What I’m Trying to Do


Around 2013-2014, Semtech released a line of RF transceivers that supported a new type of modulation: LoRa, short for “Long Range”. Based on a type myof spread spectrum called Chirp Spread Spectrum (CSS), this modulation technique promises much higher receive sensitivity than other transceivers that use various types of Frequency Shift Keying (FSK, GFSK, MSK, etc.). While LoRa is primarily designed to allow ranges of several miles using small, battery-powered devices, one can easily imagine pushing the range further with more capable equipment, such as higher power levels, higher antenna gain, etc.

Trying to Set a World Record

I’m trying to break the world record for ground-based LoRa communications, i.e., where both the transmitter are on the ground. I’m trying to do this by applying various techniques used by amateur radio operators to achieve long distance, Beyond Line-of-Sight (BLoS) communications. By increasing the power level, using high gain antennas, and possibly even using a better receive amplifier, I hope to be able to break the ground-based LoRa distance record.

LoRa Distance Records

Below are the three LoRa distance records that I’ve been able to find.

  1. Andreas Spiess — Spiess set the current ground-based LoRa record of 201km. He achieved this by hiking to the top of a large mountain in the Alps and contacted a Things Network gateway on top of another mountain.
  2. High Altitude Balloon — A Things Network station received a LoRaWAN packet from a high altitude balloon 702km away.
  3. Geosynchronous satellite communication — A group is employing the LoRa waveform to provide satellite-based IoT communications in the Ku band via a geosynchronous satellite.


The current ground-based LoRa record was a Line-of-Sight (LoS) communications that involved communicating between two mountaintops. Normally, at VHF and higher frequencies (the recordholder used LoRa communications) at 868MHz, RF communication is limited to Line-of-Sight with perhaps an additional 33% range due to the radio waves curving around the Earth somewhat.
While it is normally the case that LoS is the limitation, there are two propagation methods that can overcome this limitation: diffraction and troposcatter. Diffraction involves radio waves diffracting around terrain features like hills, while troposcatter involves small amounts of radio waves scattering off of irregularities in the composition of the upper troposphere. Generally, shorter distances (roughly 20-50mi) involve mainly diffraction, while longer distances involve troposcatter.
There’s a catch, however: both of these propagation methods experience large path losses, so they’re generally not very useful when using typical VHF+ radio equipment. Typically, to communicate using these propagation methods, one needs a combination of high power, high antenna gain, and a modulation technique that does not require a high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), such as SSB, CW, one of the WSJT-X weak signal digital modes, etc. Generally, the path losses are at least 150-170dB.
With LoRa at 433MHz and at a bitrate of 300bps, the receive sensitivity is supposed to be -138dBm. With a transmit antenna gain of ~15dB, a receive antenna gain of ~10dB, and a transmit power of ~44dBm, the total link budget becomes ~207dB. A link budget like that should make troposcatter communications possible, with some margin to spare for different losses and flaws in the radio system. These losses include features like trees and obstructions like hills and mesas blocking a good view of the horizon, antenna flaws, mismatch losses, and feedline losses.

And that’s mostly it. So far, some early results show that diffraction and troposcatter do work with LoRa on the 70cm amateur radio band. Future experiments, with improved, refined equipment, should hopefully be able to break the ground-based LoRa world record.

Other things/potential future work

Demonstrating the ability to implement packet radio communications over fairly long distances (as in tens of miles) opens up some interesting possibilities. One potential use that I find interesting is the potential for creating a wide-area mesh network. Since LoRa links can communicate over fairly long distances, it should be possible to have relatively sparse mesh networks with nodes spread far apart. Such sparse networks would make it fairly easy to stand up a citywide (or even statewide) mesh network with a few interested makers/hams. Similarly, LoRa could be used to provide long-distance backbone communications between APRS digipeaters.

Another potentially interesting product is that Semtech released roughly a 2.4GHz LoRa transceiver line roughly a year ago. The maximum receive sensitivity appears to be -132dBm, at a datarate of roughly 600bps. Amplifiers for 2.4 GHz are fairly easy to find, and there exist very high gain dish antennas (24dBi+) that could provide sufficient link budget for diffraction/troposcatter.

Test Run to Socorro (6-10-2018)


On Sunday, June 10, 2018, I conducted a test run to Socorro to see how far the LoRa packets could be received. The test setup involved the following key parameters:

  • Transmitting antenna — 14.8 dBi 15-element Yagi antenna for the 70cm band.
  • Transmitter — 5W CDEBytes LoRa transceiver.
  • Receiver — CDEBytes 1W LoRa transceiver.
  • Receiving antennas

An SPF5189Z-based LNA board purchased from Aliexpress was tested, but it did not work at all. It is possible that it was defective or damaged by ESD. The part has a fairly low ESD tolerance (500V HBM), so it is likely ESD did it in. As a result, future attempts using an LNA board will not be tried until I get some gas discharge tubes to protect the LNA from ESD.

Test Results

While the reception was not as strong as I had hoped (I was hoping to consistently receive packets in the Socorro area with the vehicle-mounted halo antenna), I would overall declare the test run a success. Using the 7-element Yagi, I could receive packets reliably SW of Socorro. Moreover, both the packets received in the Belen area and the area SW of Socorro were beyond-line-of-sight. Using the modeling tool Radio Mobile Online, the reception in Belen was most likely due to diffraction, while the reception SW of Socorro was likely due to troposcatter-based propagation.

Map of where packets were received.

Yagi down in Socorro
Receiving data down in Socorro with the portable DIY Yagi.

A Mobile, Horizontally-Polarized 70cm Antenna

I built a mobile halo antenna for 70cm. Here’s how I did it, and how well it worked.

When you’re trying to receive an RF signal while on the move, you need an antenna with an omnidirectional beam pattern in the horizontal plane. Usually, you use some sort of whip/vertical antenna for this task. Problem is, antennas like these are for vertically polarized signals. When you’re doing weak-signal work, for various reasons, you want to use horizontal polarization.

Enter the halo antenna. The halo antenna provides both, and at VHF and higher frequencies, the size is quite reasonable. While some commercial halo antennas exist, hams seem to typically build their own.

The basic design for this Halo antenna draws heavily from KR1ST’s design (http://www.kr1st.com/70cmstack.htm). I have adapted the design in several key ways.

One halo instead of four. To make sure this antenna can handle the wind load of being on a car at 75-85mph, sticking to one halo element keeps the antenna assembly from getting too tall and suffering under too much wind load.

Gamma match/center conductor mount. The connections for the feed-points are attached using small hose clamps instead of being soldered. This allows for easily tuning of the antenna by moving the position of the connections.

Halo mount. Halo element is attached to the PVC pipe by inserting the ends inside of a PVC pipe “T” connector. The halo is then secured using duct mastic. Also supporting the halo element is the coax itself, which is attached to the main “mast” using three nylon zip ties.

Building the Antenna

Halo antennas are reasonably easy to build yourself. The first step is to cut a piece of copper tubing at the appropriate length and bend it into a circle. I had the most success getting a good, clean bend by heating the tubing using a propane torch. Next, build the gamma match by bending an appropriate length of #6 bare copper wire. Attach both to the halo using small hose clamps. Solder the center conductor to the end of the gamma match.

Component List:

  1. 10′ RG-8x coaxial cable
  2. 2x small hose clamps
  3. #6 copper wire for gamma match
  4. 1/4″ copper refrigerator tube
  5. Duct mastic
  6. 10′ 3/4″ PVC pipe
  7. 4 3/4″ PVC T connectors


Close-up of the halo, showing the gamma match and mounting.

Tuning the Antenna

Since I don’t have an antenna analyzer or a network analyzer for 70cm, I tuned the antenna using an SWR meter (specifically the Signstek Professional UV Dual Band SWR and Power Meter) a spare Baofeng F8HP HT. To be cautious, I would recommend using an HT you’re willing to part with, since there’s a small risk that you’ll burn out its power amplifier if the SWR is too high.

Tuning Setup
Overview of the tuning setup. The HT provides a signal to drive the antenna, while the SWR/power meter measures the SWR.

After some painstaking tuning, which included both adjusting positions of the two feedpoints as well as the circumference of the halo and the separation distance between the two open ends, I attained an SWR in the range of 1.6-1.7:1. While not ideal (generally, people strive for SWR’s below 1.5:1), it’s good enough for these experiments. Using the coax/SWR loss calculator at (http://www.qsl.net/co8tw/Coax_Calculator.htm), a 1.7:1 SWR loses approximately 0.1dB versus an ideal 1:1 SWR.

Results of the SWR testing. At 433MHz, the SWR is roughly 1.6-1.7:1. The topmost SWR line is the one to read, since the output power of the Baofeng F8HP power level is below 15W.

Field Testing

To test out this mobile antenna, I put on top of the roof of my car. I then drove south along I-25 in order to listen to incoming signals transmitted from a 15-element 70cm Yagi antenna mounted on the roof of my house (I’ll discuss this antenna setup in a future post).

Enter a caAntenna mounted on the roof of my car. I secure the antenna to my Yakima removable roof rack with zip ties.



The weather was…rough. Down around Los Lunas through Belen, there was series of major storms. These storms included not only rain, but a significant amount of hail. Well, the antenna’s durability will definitely get tested now!

I-25 Southbound near Belen. That’s hail, not snow, on the ground.

Overall, the antenna did great. It continued to receive while moving at highway speeds, in the rain, and even while hail was pouring down. It survived serious hail and rain without any damage or even having any of the antenna elements thrown out of alignment.

Antenna post-hailstorm. Still looking good.

My car, however, did not do so great. When I pulled over during one of the heavy downpours, I heard thump-thump-thump from the rear passenger-side wheel area. I pulled over, and checked the tire. It looked fine. I started to drive again, and heard a horrible grinding sound. I pulled over again, and looked more carefully. I discovered that the brake caliper had detached itself from the knuckle. At point, I had a good friend rescue me, and I left the car behind. I returned the following day, and had a tow truck tow the car back to the house.

Surveying the damage after having the car towed back home. Brake hose is cut (it got torn apart after being taken off the tow truck), caliper is cut into, and backing plate is bent.

Create your website with WordPress.com
Get started