cable conversion to hydraulic clutch
#11
cliff ment small 4 bangers obviously, so yes the focus falls into that category (though not an import). hence why he said they dont have the torque rating and clamping pressure required for a car with 300+tq.
i dont know for sure what the stock clutch is rated to in torque numbers, but even the "weakest" aftermarket ones are all rated to over 450tq depending on the clutch. they are 11" or 10.5" disks and can hold 500tq. how big do you think the clutch is on a 4cyl? how much raw fury do you think they have to hold back? all of 120 torque?
i dont know for sure what the stock clutch is rated to in torque numbers, but even the "weakest" aftermarket ones are all rated to over 450tq depending on the clutch. they are 11" or 10.5" disks and can hold 500tq. how big do you think the clutch is on a 4cyl? how much raw fury do you think they have to hold back? all of 120 torque?
#12
cliff ment small 4 bangers obviously, so yes the focus falls into that category (though not an import). hence why he said they dont have the torque rating and clamping pressure required for a car with 300+tq.
i dont know for sure what the stock clutch is rated to in torque numbers, but even the "weakest" aftermarket ones are all rated to over 450tq depending on the clutch. they are 11" or 10.5" disks and can hold 500tq. how big do you think the clutch is on a 4cyl? how much raw fury do you think they have to hold back? all of 120 torque?
i dont know for sure what the stock clutch is rated to in torque numbers, but even the "weakest" aftermarket ones are all rated to over 450tq depending on the clutch. they are 11" or 10.5" disks and can hold 500tq. how big do you think the clutch is on a 4cyl? how much raw fury do you think they have to hold back? all of 120 torque?
#13
Oh yeah--those 2.xL 4 bangers can really crank out the torque...
#14
I agree with Cliff. I actuall had mine converted to a hydraulic clutch and am thinking about changing it back. I had my stang converted from a auto to a manual. I was never happy with the clutch pressure. When converting it did get easier but the travel is much greater. I really dont like it. I did some research on the upr site and they have a quardrant that claims to make the clutch 20% lighter. I would try that first and any of the other ideas cliff has. I still feel there may be a problem with mine because i have the same centerforce clutch as my brother and his pedal even before the conversion was much ligther then mine. I dont know if it has anything to do with the pedal swap but its been very fustrating. I would not recommend the conversion being someone who actually did it.
#16
I have seen conversion kits in the past, don't see any right now--however as "945L" said, other than complexity it adds nothing.
The clutch lever requires "X" amount of force to move "Y" distance, or "XY" amount of work, to disengage the clutch--for any given pressure plate/spring (clamping force) and throwout lever combination this is a fixed amount of work.
So, it will take "XY" amount of work at the clutch pedal (plus an amount to account for the control mechanism's inefficiencies) to disengage the clutch. A hydraulic system may (might, maybe) have a slight efficiency edge over the cable--however assuming the cable is properly lubricated and the sleeve (and cable) not damaged that gain would be very small.
Many assume, because the hydraulic clutches typically used on imports require less pedal pressure to operate, that there is some magical property to the hydraulic control system that reduces the required force. This is simply not so, these cars have "softer" clutches because the clutches themselves have much lower torque ratings, and much lower clamping forces, and therefore much lower actuating forces.
[edit]
There are hydraulic "throw out bearings" that can reduce pedal force, however that's a whole different ball-game...
[/edit]
The clutch lever requires "X" amount of force to move "Y" distance, or "XY" amount of work, to disengage the clutch--for any given pressure plate/spring (clamping force) and throwout lever combination this is a fixed amount of work.
So, it will take "XY" amount of work at the clutch pedal (plus an amount to account for the control mechanism's inefficiencies) to disengage the clutch. A hydraulic system may (might, maybe) have a slight efficiency edge over the cable--however assuming the cable is properly lubricated and the sleeve (and cable) not damaged that gain would be very small.
Many assume, because the hydraulic clutches typically used on imports require less pedal pressure to operate, that there is some magical property to the hydraulic control system that reduces the required force. This is simply not so, these cars have "softer" clutches because the clutches themselves have much lower torque ratings, and much lower clamping forces, and therefore much lower actuating forces.
[edit]
There are hydraulic "throw out bearings" that can reduce pedal force, however that's a whole different ball-game...
[/edit]
#18
#19
That too. I had a King Cobra original in my old 96 and it was a nightmare. I changed it out with a King Cobra 20% reduced pedal effort one and it was much more manageable.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
breaking
Audio/Visual Electronics
5
10-02-2015 01:27 PM
junior04
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
1
09-28-2015 10:53 AM