I used the Granada spindles. The holes for the ball joint studs need to be reamed a little larger. Many people have done this on 57's. The Granada spindles with lower the front of the car about 2" so if you want to keep a stock ride height this isn't recommended. Also you need wheels with a larger center hole, the stock ones won't work. I like it having a little rake so it worked for me but I have scraped the heavy duty non stock sway bar a few times on some steep angle driveways. I'm still running 14" tires, wish I had 15" that would help.

did you buy a kit or make your own adapters. cliff

I used Granada discs on the front of my Ranchero with no booster and it stops really well compared to the old drums..

you also need the valve that stops the flow tothe side with no presure re a broken line or leak.i did a conversion to my 57 ranchero and need that valve as ther is no advantage to the dual,as a prev poster mentioned. I.used a 8in vac booster not much improvement in brakes,i think bonded lineing  is to hard and needs more boost,at least the lineing i got. discs in the future . and not enough room for larger booster/.

I'm not familiar with the 67 master, seems strange they would have two different size reservoirs. You will need a Y or a T to add the brake light switch. I used a T when I did my 57 Ranchero.

one other thing the brake switch from the single stage cylinder it had two wires going to it. Do I need to put a "Y" connection on that to put that switch back on the new dual cylinder?

well it said on application that it was for front drum brakes. plus they were not using disc brakes in 67 on the f100 were they? 

Normally a master with a large and small reservoir are for disc/drum systems and the large one is for the front discs. Drum/drum masters have equal size reservoirs. I don't think a front disc reservoir master will have a residual valve like needed for front drums..

I finally got the dual master cylinder installed.. I used a MC from a 67 f100 it bolted up easy and the lines were pretty easy I just used new lines. A little heat and pb blaster and all the fittings broke loose. The only question I have is on the MC you have the front and back connections the back connection has the bigger reservoir does the bigger reservoir need to go to the front or the back? Does it really matter? I assumed it went to the back as it has to travel further.  It is all bleed out and the brake feels good and solid. Can anyone help me with this?

I went through a complete brake rebuild on my 56 Victoria last summer, and I am presently changing over to a dual master cylinder now.  I decided to go with the dual master cylinder after noticing that my Bendix and Raybestos wheel cylinders and original master cylinder were made in China. I just don't trust the elastomers and etc.  so if I loose a wheel cylinder on the front I'll still have back brakes (and vice versa) using the dual master cylinder.  I replaced all my metal lines with stainless steel ones from "Classic Lines" (I believe was the name).  They were about $130, so that's less than you would pay for a quality double flare tool.  Also, this will save you hours in trying to get the bends and lengths correct.  The lines fit very will, but not perfect in a couple of locations.  Since the lines are 3/16" on the 56 cars, I didn't have much trouble bending them.  An exception was where there were larger lines over the 3/16" lines for protection (as per the factory).  All other things being the same except regular steel verses stainless steel, the later will not be any more difficult to bend since both have nearly the same modulus of elasticity (which relates to material stiffness).  My main reason for going to SS lines was due to the fact that brake fluid (except DOT5) absorbs water and therefore steel lines rust from both the outside in, and from the inside out.  This is also a very good reason for renewing the brake lines on an old car - when they are almost rusted through, you can't tell by looking.  The DOT5 fluid does not absorb water, but has other problems - such as potential elastomer incompatibility.  Now for the dual master cylinder.  I purchased one for a 1967 Mustang.  After purchasing it, I got busy on other projects for several months and never opened the box.  After looking at it, I noticed the push rod was installed and it wouldn't come out.  Some research revealed that the push rod is supposed to be uninstalled, and it has a clip which expands into a groove when installed and essentually cannot be removed after that. Lesson learned - check the box to see that it is uninstalled.  Some measuring revealed that the distance from the back of the flange to the center of the hole (into which the eccentric on the pedal goes) was shorter than original.  I won't go into much detail on how I fixed this, except that I have a lathe and the push rod now includes an adjustable threaded (high strength) collar.  Also, the eccentric only provides about 1/4" adjustment at the pedal.  An important point is to make sure that there is some free play of the pedal at the upper end so that the piston in the master cylinder comes all the way back.  If this doesn't happen, the brakes will start not releasing all the way as pressure in the lines will not be relieved.  The importance of pedal ratio was previously mentioned.  The question is - will the pedal activate all of the master cylinder stroke.  In my case, I noticed that the stroke in the 67 Mustang MC was just a little shorter than the original.  So, after bleeding the brakes, I broke a bleeder on the front and the pedal dead ended about 2" up off the floor.  Same when breaking a bleeder on the rear.  I haven't done at actual "rolling" test yet, but I will.