4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang Technical discussions on 1996-2004 4.6 Liter Modular Motors (2V and 4V) within.

cable conversion to hydraulic clutch

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-26-2010, 04:24 PM
  #11  
MU71L4710N
5th Gear Member
 
MU71L4710N's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location:
Posts: 3,189
Default

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?
MU71L4710N is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 04:27 PM
  #12  
a_penquin
4th Gear Member
 
a_penquin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: GA
Posts: 1,022
Default

Originally Posted by MU71L4710N
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?
Its the old saying, your car makes less torque than my lug nuts take.
a_penquin is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 05:33 PM
  #13  
cliffyk
TECH SAVANT
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Saint Augustine, FL
Posts: 10,938
Default

Originally Posted by sportsguy0502
So the list of V8 i driven is one other, and its a ford ranger, with a small block in it, and it is 10% lighter then mine, but then my brother has a SVT focus, with hydro clutch in it, and it is so nice. Is that considered import?
Oh yeah--those 2.xL 4 bangers can really crank out the torque...
cliffyk is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 05:47 PM
  #14  
cliffyk
TECH SAVANT
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Saint Augustine, FL
Posts: 10,938
Default

Originally Posted by Warrior1876
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.
The only way to lessen the force required is to lengthen the throw--that's just plain ol' fundamental mechanical principle at work...
cliffyk is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 05:49 PM
  #15  
cliffyk
TECH SAVANT
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Saint Augustine, FL
Posts: 10,938
Default

Originally Posted by a_penquin
Its the old saying, your car makes less torque than my lug nuts take.
I like "It's less torque than my crank pulley bolt!"
cliffyk is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 05:55 PM
  #16  
JC316
4th Gear Member
 
JC316's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,925
Default

Originally Posted by cliffyk
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]
Yeah, my 95 F-150 has the hydraulic TOB and it has minimal pedal effort. I would love to retrofit that style setup to a Mustang.
JC316 is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 07:15 PM
  #17  
0949er
4th Gear Member
 
0949er's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,909
Default

OB just buy a better clutch. That excessive pressure on your pedal is directly related to the clutch you have.
0949er is offline  
Old 10-26-2010, 07:21 PM
  #18  
cliffyk
TECH SAVANT
 
cliffyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Saint Augustine, FL
Posts: 10,938
Default

Originally Posted by 0949er
OB just buy a better clutch. That excessive pressure on your pedal is directly related to the clutch you have.
How do we know that it's excessive, and which clutch is it that he has?
cliffyk is offline  
Old 10-27-2010, 01:03 AM
  #19  
JC316
4th Gear Member
 
JC316's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,925
Default

Originally Posted by 0949er
OB just buy a better clutch. That excessive pressure on your pedal is directly related to the clutch you have.
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.
JC316 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Thunderball
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
15
11-22-2015 11:49 PM
kevsgt
2005-2014 Mustangs
5
10-09-2015 10:12 PM
breaking
Audio/Visual Electronics
5
10-02-2015 01:27 PM
Explosive
Street/Strip
17
10-02-2015 07:45 AM
junior04
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
1
09-28-2015 10:53 AM



Quick Reply: cable conversion to hydraulic clutch



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:01 AM.