225 Clutch Fork Issue

I am trying to rebuild a '67 CJ5 that has a Dauntless with the buick bell housing.

I am struggling with getting the clutch to function as it feels like the fork keeps slipping off and won't move.

I've purchased/replaced/aligned the clutch (from RockAuto).

I've got a new throwout bearing and fork from Walck's.

The problem I feel is that the fork is 'too far in there' and not sitting/engaging on the pivot ball correctly.

Here is the best picture I am able to take without a borescope: IMG_1343.JPG

and it does look like the bottom clip has not engaged on the pivot.

Should the clips on the fork be only be engaging at the tail end like in the picture, or should the pivot be seated in the curved section of the clips?

Thanks!

 

jjdebarros: Maybe I can finally be the one to help someone else!
Others around here know more than I do, but I have been through exactly what you're doing.
The pivot ball needs to rest in the indentation on the fork. Do get there, I've had to push the fork in to where you have yours -- past the point of matching the ball and the indendation. Make sure the ends of the fork, springs included, are inside the throwout bearing carrier's channel, not pinching the "rim" of the bearing carrier. If that's OK, grab the end of the fork with some big ol' pliers and give it a good yank. You want the curved springs visible in your photo to slide onto the flat part of the pivot ball, cradling the stud. You will feel everything snap into place. I will look for photos.

 

[QUOTE=" I will look for photos.[/QUOTE]

On the other hand, mine is dis-assembled, so I took a new photo. Ignore the angle of the fork in my photo. I have it pushed forward to get a better view. The important thing is the relationship between the pivot stud and the springs.

 

On the other hand, mine is dis-assembled, so I took a new photo. Ignore the angle of the fork in my photo. I have it pushed forward to get a better view. The important thing is the relationship between the pivot stud and the springs.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, I was assuming that the indentation was more than 'cosmetic'!