Hello All,
My thoughts are that the addition of a 1/4" to 3/8" shim where the slave
attaches to the plate might make up for worn clevis pins/holes between
the clutch pedal and the rod??? Would I be correct in that assumption??
Jay Welch, Abington MA
Secretary, "Cape Cod British Car Club"
http://clubs.hemmings.com/capecodbritish/
1973 TR6 driver, 1971 TR6 project
1989 Mustang GT someday morphing into a Factory Five '65 Roadster
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002 05:42:38 -0700 (PDT) michael lunsford
<mblunsfordsr@yahoo.com> writes:
> Jim Franks wrote:
>
> <Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:49:19 -0400
> From: "James Franks" <jimmble@adelphia.net>
> Subject: Re: Clutch Problem
>
> <Mike,
>
> <Moving the slave cylinder, or adding washers, or lengthening the
> pushrod
> does NOT change the travel range of the slave cylinder piston. It
> may
> move the travel to an unworn area in the slave cylinder bore, which
> is
> the only potential benefit of doing this. ( I have gained a few
> years
> service from a bad slave this way) With new or unworn parts,
> assemble
> as
> designed for best result>
>
> My response to the above is that I know that the range of the slave
> cylinder does not change with these alterations. The suggested
> changes result in the slave cylinder being in a position that takes
> up any slackness between the pushrod and the initial disengagement
> of the throw out bearing fork to the clutch. This idea is identical
> to the fact that the adjustment of the rear brake shoes to the point
> where they are closer to the drums results in less travel in the
> brake pedal. This may not be the actual problem but it is a lot
> easier to check/try this idea than to remove the transmission to
> check the fork/throw out bearing/clutch. I learned this lesson the
> hard way by putting the slave on the wrong side of the plate during
> my restoration-BTDT. Good Luck.
>
> Mike Lunsford, 1970 TR6
> HotJobs, a Yahoo! service - Search Thousands of New Jobs
|