Yet another clutch problem.

The PO added swinging peddles and modified the clutch linkage. When I opened the clutch bell housing I found the clutch fork off the pivot and the fork securing brackets bent out of shape. Now after the restoration is almost done I reconnected the clutch and found the push rod on the clutch fork is pushing the clutch at such an upward angle that the clutch fork is again being pushed off the pivot. I would like to add a hydraulic clutch but there is no room to add a push slave cylinder to the clutch fork because it done's stick out far enough past the bell housing. How about a pull type slave cylinder, has anyone done this. See how in my pictures below the fork doesn't come out far enough to add a push hydraulic cylinder.
Thanks for your help, this site is great

 

You can do a pull hydraulic slave cylinder..........but not being able to see what that clutch folk looks like it may very well be the wrong one...........there is a longer version fork arm that is cast metal unlike the formed sheet-metal one you have in the picture...............

Is that cross shaft and that linkage hanging down part of the new swing pedal linkage? A picture of the rest of the linkage would be helpful.

Basically you'll have to first determine if you have the right clutch fork in the bell housing , and then whether or not you can get the mechanical linkage to work in the confines you have...........If not then the hydraulic linkage is probably your only other option.............
Note:
Clutch pedal ratio at the foot pad should be about 6:1 for either Mechanical or hydraulic clutches ...........the ratio then changes to 2:1 at the clutch fork pin inside the bell housing where it moves the throw out bearing..............meaning whatever travel you had in your linkage coming from the pedal would get cut in half at the throw out bearing inside............this is important as you will need about .500 " of travel at the throw out bearing to fully disengage the clutch............add another .100-.200 " of clutch free play to the linkage and you'll need at least somewhere close to .750 " of travel at the throw out bearing to make the system work properly...............as mentioned above all of this is important as you start to gauge how much travel you can get out of the basic mechanical linkage and or if you decide to go Hydraulic's then bore sizes in both cylinders will also need to be matched up to get maximum travel to the slave.

 

just did this in the boys 70,used novak parts for the slave and release arm, speedway adjustable pivot, and flaps for the master .the novak parts are a bit pricy but very nice quality. no way i coulda got the bell crank to work no room...

 

I am in the process of doing this currently. My fork was too short as well and didn't stick out past the bell. When I opened the bell up I found the fork hadn't come off of the pivot ball, but had split in two, had a huge crack almost all the way across it. I have a chevy engine and trans, so I had to look up he proper fork and it is indeed longer. with the removeal of the frame mounted brake master cylinder there seems to be plenty of room there for the slave (push type). I haven't purchased my slave yet, I am currently making the bracket for the slave, but don't see any problems with space.

 

I used a Wilwood pull back slave with one of their master cylinders:

 

did you use the stock arm?

 

If space is a concern how about a hydraulic throwout bearing? The link isn't for the bearing but it has a pic of one.http://www.summitracing.com/parts/mcl-1429?seid=srese1&gclid=CJawpJLBtskCFQ2OaQodEWUAng

 

Stock stamped clutch release arm. I also used the adjustable pivot ball from Novak.

 

On my racer I had used the dreaded cable (i bought new and had zero issues with) and the adjustable pivot in a Lakewood bell. No problems after that. Just made sure cable lined up with attachment point of fork. Used the stock fork

 

Thanks everyone for your suggestions, it give me a lot to think about.
My hanging petal is configured more for pushing so I don't think the cable method will work without changing the petal. With the transmission and clutch already attached to the engine and both mounted under the frame I really don't want to open it up again. Posimoto, Thanks for the picture of your setup, nice job I must add. I assumed you manufactured the mounting bracket yourself. That setup would work well for me. Thanks.

 

I probably still have the paper template for the bracket, however, it's specific for a Ford T18 tranny.

 

I had a Speedway Motors hydraulic slave and Wildwood master, pulling on the factory clutch release lever that looks like yours. I wore one slave out, and Speedway sent me a second one. Once that one started leaking past the seals, I went to a cable. I think the part number is Crown Automotive #J0992533. It's around 49 or 50 inches long. I have been really happy with the cable. I had to adjust it a couple times, but now that it has stretched, it's been trouble free. I carry a spare just in case, but haven't had to use it so far. If you want pics of brackets, let me know.

 

fhoehle thanks for the reply, I would love to see what you have done with the cable clutch brackets. I just ordered a Wilwood master and slave, but after reading your post I think I need to at least take a look at the cable option.

 

It is critical that you set up your slave so that it pulls in a straight line from the release arm. If it's not a straight line you can expect to have a leaking problem at the slave. That may or may not have been an issue with fhoehle's setup. But that is the primary cause of short lived slave cylinders.