Ok so Ive just about pulled out all of my hair on this project of mine and I like my hair:mad3:. I don't know how to explain this in a shorter fashion so please bear with the long winded explanation.

I have a Chevy K10/20 mix. I have a 383 stroker that I'm trying to mate to a Sm465/np208 combo. I have replaced/put on the following brand newparts: flywheel, clutch, pressure plate, clutch fork, throwout bearing, pilot bearing, custom adapter for slave cylinder to mount to bell housing, slave cylinder, master cylinder, reservoir, hydraulic lines, pedal setup for hydraulic, and my own blood.

Everything is currently on the truck installed per instruction/guides/experience/dumb luck. I've bled the hydraulics like 100 times:barf:. I can see the clutch fork move up to 2inches~when pedal is depressed. The clutch does not disengage when the pedal is pushed to the floor.

I've pretty much decided it has to be the either the clutch master cylinder, slave cylinder, clutch fork, or push rod length? I've experimented with different lengths of push rods all making sure that the length allows for at least a 16th inch gap between the clutch fingers and the throw out bearing.

as my paint diagrams below show I'v got an 1982 pre hydraulic clutch fork setup currently. And I have an example of the hydraulic clutch fork setup as well.

My question is: Does it matter that I have the non hydraulic clutch fork I have now or is my clutch not disengaging because of the style of fork? Isn't there some way I could make the current setup work???

Thanks for any help you can give.


468621

468622

468623

Anybody........ I need some tech answers PLEASE!!!! I know someone has switched to hydraulic for better shifting when twisted up...............:(

My only thought is your slave doesn't have enough thow in it.Or maybee the MC doesn't push enough fluid.Did you get factory Chevy parts or mismatched.Why not use all factory stuff incuding the hydro bellhousing?

All the parts are stock chevy pieces just new ones from NAPA. I fabbed a bracket cause I don't have easy access to a hydro bell housing. The adapter puts it basically where the stock slave would be.


You have an interesting point regarding the throw amount in the slave-i was wondering the same thing..... I know this is kinda crazy but do you know of any slaves that would have a bigger throw than NAPA part NNC37791 a stock chevy slave???

Thanks for the input.

Do you have any pics of the adapter you built on?So I can compare it to my stock hydro set up.The only other thing I think it could be is the different clutch arms.

A quick search of CK5 showed that everyone who's tried to convert to hydraulic without switching the fork has problems, just like yours. The geometry is quite a bit different. Get a fork meant for the hydraulic clutch setup, and you should be good.

I really hope I can figure something out that won't involve dropping the F'n:mad3: tranny again. here is a quick paint thing of the adapter.
Thanks again-

468680


Just saw thedrip's post. thanks for that tip I don't have a membership over there. I saw the manual swap articvle over oin their site and wasn't to big on some of the info..

S_ _ T I guess I'm gonna have to eat it and swap the d _ _n forks.....

thanks

Guess that info says it unless anyone else has tried something different or crazy that has worked??

how much actual movement are you getting from the contact point of slave and fork? What bore diameter is the master and slave? Stock gm of the mid 80's? What style clutch and pressure plate throwout bearing are you using?

All the parts are stock chevy pieces just new ones from NAPA. I fabbed a bracket cause I don't have easy access to a hydro bell housing. The adapter puts it basically where the stock slave would be.


You have an interesting point regarding the throw amount in the slave-i was wondering the same thing..... I know this is kinda crazy but do you know of any slaves that would have a bigger throw than NAPA part NNC37791 a stock chevy slave???

Thanks for the input.If the hydraulic fork is shorter from pivot to contact pointof the pushrod, it will give it more throw. Is there any way to move the contact point closer to the pivot point?

My Hydro setup works fine with a manual type fork & castiron bell. But I am using a 80s LandCruzer slave & 86+Gm Master.

I'm using a stock gm from mid 80s with a NAPA diaphragm style clutch what they call a high pressure clutch assembly with the supplied throwout bearing which is the same as a stock gm throwout (checked and measured).

Ive got the spacing of the push rod setup with a 16th spacing from the fingers and the push rod is pushing the fork at the contact point just shy of an inch. I'm thinking that the slave may not have enough throw:confused:??

Burt4x4 TELL ME WHAT VODOO MAGIC YOU USED!!!! I'm gonna go hit NAPA and compare their landcruzer slaves to the 80s gm slave cylinder I have. By any chance do you know how far you fork is moving at where the push rod touches AND what year cruzer that slave is from? Maybe any photos??

Thanks everyone!!!

If the hydraulic fork is shorter from pivot to contact pointof the pushrod, it will give it more throw. Is there any way to move the contact point closer to the pivot point?


Thats an interesting point...I could cut and weld the fork shorter..... or just drop the tranny and swap forks...cutting and welding doesn't involve dropping though....... I'm gonna compare the stats of cruzer vs. chevy throwout lengths and I post after that...
thanks

This is interesting. I'm having the same problem on my K-5 except its an nv-4500.

I have the same Novak setup and I am using the manual clutch fork not the stamped one. works fine I remember it just took a while to dial it in.
good luck

Not sure my input is of much value, since I'm using an Advanced Adapters bell housing, and an NV4500 trans--not sure what the differences are when compared to a stock Chevy housing.
However, I am using a stock GM clutch arm, #15687296 that is cast, and is straight--no bends. The arm works with GM through-out bearing N1430. I think it's important to match the release arm, through-out bearing, and clutch.
AA instructions say to set arm angle forward 3 to 5* for best geometry. This is achieved using an adjustable pivot ball. You also set up a .060 clearance between the clutch fingers and the through-out bearing using the threaded push rod from the slave cylinder. Note, my clutch arm has two "v" notches cast into it, that mate up to a standard GM "wedge" that fits over the slave cylinder push rod; I'm using the inside wedge.
I'm also using a slave cylinder (.750 bore) used on '80-'83 Jeep CJ's with the 2.5L GM 4-banger, along with my stock '88 XJ master cylinder.

Yes the voodoo recepie calls for one live chicken, 6pack of beer and a can of copenhagen :smokin: hehee
Ok too much coffee today..

I normaly would have pics to show you but my club's site is down and cannot access my pic gallery.

Shouldn't matter I have a 72K5 as most all GM is the same.
What I did was get Advance Adpter slave mount for a LandCruzer slave to GM bell. AA makes this for the LC guys that put Chevy drive trains in their rigs. I belive the Slave is from 80up LCruzers, it's held to the bracket with two bolts. The bracket is held to the bell using two of the bell bolts on the fork side. Used An3 hose to connect to the GM Master I mounted to my firewall, the push rod is connected to my factory clutch pedal via drilled hole in the pedal. I used a degree finder to make sure the pushrod was the same angle as the master to ensure a straight throw when pressed in.

I added a return spring from the slave mount to the end of the fork to ensure the fork fully pulls away from the pressure plate. I have never messured the throw but the pushrod in the Slave is simply a bolt with the head removed and cone shape to seat into the slave. It took a few tries to get the push rod in the sweet spot throw vs. release.

Hands down the hardest part of this whole setup was bleeding the system. I had to bleed in sections starting with the master, then fil the hose then push the air out of the slave.

Been working great eversence...
.025c

Ive got the spacing of the push rod setup with a 16th spacing from the fingers and the push rod is pushing the fork at the contact point just shy of an inch. I'm thinking that the slave may not have enough throw:confused:??

Are you saying that your slave is only moving an inch? Doesn't seem like enough to me.

Thanks for all the help and info!!!!

1. Burt4x4- 1 live chicken, 6 pack, and cope CHECK :D

2. I'm getting just under an inch of movement from the rod and I have a 16th inch space from the clutch fingers to the throwout bearing.

3. I went to NAPA and went through 15 slaves checking throw.

4. found that a 91 chevy slave has 3 inches of throw!!!:smokin: May be the ticket!!!

5. Ill try to install the slave tomorrow wednesday and I'll let everyone know.

Thanks for all the help and info!!!!

Replaced my slave cylinder yesterday, and did a little measuring while under the Jeep.
My slave cylinder has a 7/8 bore, and a piston travel max of ~1.5 inches.
With my pedal contacting the floor mat, my clutch release arm moves 3/4 inch! My clutch (a centerforce 11 incher) has no problem releasing from the flywheel; however, I don't like having to go to the floor for release. I'm currently looking at replacing my MC (it's showing signs of leaking), and have discovered that maybe when I last changed out MC's, that I may have installed one with a smaller bore/stroke; there appears to be more than a couple of choices for my year Jeep.
I understand that generally, clutch hydraulics should be designed for 1:1--meaning MC bore equals slave cylinder bore. Changing the slave because it has the potential for longer travel won't help, unless the MC moves enough volume to use the slaves added volume.

just posting so i can find this later

Replaced my slave cylinder yesterday, and did a little measuring while under the Jeep.
My slave cylinder has a 7/8 bore, and a piston travel max of ~1.5 inches.
With my pedal contacting the floor mat, my clutch release arm moves 3/4 inch! My clutch (a centerforce 11 incher) has no problem releasing from the flywheel; however, I don't like having to go to the floor for release. I'm currently looking at replacing my MC (it's showing signs of leaking), and have discovered that maybe when I last changed out MC's, that I may have installed one with a smaller bore/stroke; there appears to be more than a couple of choices for my year Jeep.
I understand that generally, clutch hydraulics should be designed for 1:1--meaning MC bore equals slave cylinder bore. Changing the slave because it has the potential for longer travel won't help, unless the MC moves enough volume to use the slaves added volume.


Well that makes sense :shaking: so I'm just gonna go pick up a 1991 master cylinder as well just to make sure everything is on the level then. Thanks man for the heads up!

Guess I'll finish installing the parts tommorrow and we'll see how eveything works...

Well I'm gonna break down and just buy a new hydro bellhousing and clutch fork and be done with it.:mad3: I tried the new 91 master and slave and there was more movement but no clutch disengagement.:mad3:
Thanks for all the input.