News:

SMF - installed December 2017.
Returning members - please use the 'Forgot Password' function when logging in to the new Forum for the first time. If you have changed your email address please let me know so I can update it.

Main Menu

Concern about Clutch Assembly

Started by UFR131, May 28, 2010, 14:35:37

Previous topic - Next topic

UFR131

Following a complete overhaul, the AC engine and gearbox are now back in my Ace. On reinstalling the clutch, I found that I had to use most of the extension on the threaded end fitting of the slave cylinder rod to achieve the maximum recommended free play (3/8")when the slave cylinder is fully compressed (this seemed odd given that it is a new cluch and thrust bearing and presumably should only need to be using max adjusted length with a worn clutch assembly?). When the clutch is actuated there is only approximately 1/2" of travel on the end of the clutch actuation lever before it comes into contact with the bell housing and the clutch pedal is not fully depressed. This does not seem right at all and I am concerned that I may  have incorrectly reassembled the cluch acuating assembly although looking through the access/vent aperature on the top of the bellhousing it all seems to be sitting right. Interesting, the bell housing shoews signs of wear as if the end of clutch actuating cylinder had always rubbed against the casting on full extension
   
   I can't test the clutch as none of the ancilliaries are yet fitted and don't want to put all of these back on if I the engine has to be removed. Before I go through the trauma of taking the engine back out of the car, could anyone through any light on this ?
   
   John

AE413

Is it possible the position of the release bearing operating lever and the clutch cylinder lever have moved relative to one another? I recall having a similar problem but in my case the clutch did not operate at all. I corrected it by moving the clutch slave cylinder operating lever round on the shaft and reclamping it. Engine removal was not necessary.
   
   John

UFR131

The clutch lever attachment is such that it could only be fitted in the current position or rotated 180 degrees. So unfortunately don't think it can be that, but thanks anyway.
   
   John

Peter Hoskin

John, just seen your query and am interested to hear how you have overcome it.  I ham having a problem with my clutch.  I replaced the standard B&B clutch plate and carbon thrust with a modern diaphragm clutch and thrust ball bearing.  Different movement so I measured clearances and installed an adaptor ring behind the thrust bearing to compensate.Put engine in etc and started up but found I could not engage gear with the engine running. ie clutch was not disengaging.  I tried all sort of tricks like reversing the lever between the rod and clutch cross shaft, extending rod length to max., adjusting the outer tie bolt that links the slave cylinder mounting plate to the bell housing.  I got to a position where the clutch would disengage but as soon as everything was warm I had the same problem.  To change gear I had to stop engine , engage new gear and start engine again!   I stripped and removed the engine again, re measured the clearances and worked out I needed a further 3.5 mm spacer.  I fitted it and replaced the engine.  This time I checked by raising one rear wheel and confirming I could turn it.  I then replaced all the bits and started the engine and found I could use the clutch as normal.  In my case the operating rod is wound back to minimum length so that I can just rotate it by hand and the lever that engages the tie rod is just aft of vertical ie it moves through the vertical position as it is operated.   Sounds good?  No, I still have a problem in engaging bottem gear when hot and at the traffic lights!  With no synchro. on first this can be a problem solved by engaging second then first but does not work in my case.  I resleeved the slave cylinder to a slightly smaller diameter to increase its throw but made no difference.  Still pondering but not wanting to remove engine again!  Any ideas?
   Peter Hoskin