Sorry to hear about your dilemma, credit V8 Archie for first mentioning that the Fiero MC would have to be limited in its travel or volume flow. Shortening the rod will change pedal position and you may not like that. That's why I chose the method I did until I have time to do something more professional. Check with Tampa Bay clutch as the last time I was there I saw some HTOBs on the shelf about 2 months ago. What did you come up with on the maximum travel length?
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 07-09-2010).]
i did overextend the htob. after taking it apart, i can see a small clip at the end of the cylinder is partially pulled off. looking inside the cylinder, i can see part of a seal that was sheared off whe the piston was retracted. now, can i get a seal. and how can i keep this from happening again.?
tech note. the area of the htob is .887 square inches. i have read that the master is 11/16 or .371 square inches. (math is good)
Since the clutch master came with my HTOB connector hose, I am going to try to use the stock clutch master for the G6.
What is the distance from the clutch fingers to the bellhousing face on your clutch setup? I did the $100+ over extension on a 92-94 HTOB years ago (they do not have a snap ring to retain them)... so I feel your pain. Ensuring you have adequte extension range before over extending the HTOB is a must. For my custom setup, I made a spacer to shim the HTOB further from the case (you can not go too thick or you will move the input shaft seal onto the tapered portion of the shaft.
i think the answer came to me while my kids were trying to keep me from sleeping in this morning. just came to me.
i'll bet when the clutch pedal jumped back, the pushrod came out of its seat and was resting on the edge of the cup giving it a good bit more travel. . . . ?
joseph, it is going to be a week before i can get any parts to put this back together and try to watch slave travel. about moving the master cylinder, i am missing something, doesnt that move the pedal forward too? when you say a better solution, are you thinking a smaller master to limit travel and reduce effort? i am already very close to getting one of these with cylinder of my choice (what would that be?) cant stand the pivot at the top of the pedal. my foot keeps climbing the pedal as i use it. have to keep repositioning. my foot is pivoted at the heel. the pedal should be too.
guru, i have all my measurements at work. actually, i really need to make a drawing of the system so i can figure it. i will try to post it.
in my fruitless search for a htob piston i came across quartermaster install instructions.
they claim clutch release travel of about .180"
they also claim htob travel of about .250" for a 5/8 master cylinder moving 1"(no info on area of there slave)
they also recommend instalation of a PEDAL STOP for the clutch pedal. basically, feel the driveshaft for clutch disengagement (after bleeding). and set a stop near the platform part of the pedal. make it for .250' more travel than the release point. tampa bay clutches says no go on parts either (thanks for the lead) i have given up on parts pursuit. will order new htob. anyone have a lead on how to get just the adapter to go into the htob? i machined/cobbled up an adapter that is currently working, but cannot find any parts at a salvage yard or ebay.
[This message has been edited by ricreatr (edited 07-12-2010).]
i think the answer came to me while my kids were trying to keep me from sleeping in this morning. just came to me.
i'll bet when the clutch pedal jumped back, the pushrod came out of its seat and was resting on the edge of the cup giving it a good bit more travel. . . . ?
joseph, it is going to be a week before i can get any parts to put this back together and try to watch slave travel. about moving the master cylinder, i am missing something, doesnt that move the pedal forward too? when you say a better solution, are you thinking a smaller master to limit travel and reduce effort? i am already very close to getting one of these with cylinder of my choice (what would that be?) cant stand the pivot at the top of the pedal. my foot keeps climbing the pedal as i use it. have to keep repositioning. my foot is pivoted at the heel. the pedal should be too.
guru, i have all my measurements at work. actually, i really need to make a drawing of the system so i can figure it. i will try to post it.
Haven't given it much thought at the moment since the current setup works without a problem and given the amount of time that has passed I'm not exactly sure what all I did. I believe there is a return spring on the clutch pedal, I just don't recall anything unusual about how it functions in my car. I'll make sure I don't run the risk of over extending the TOB.
as a preface to my particular project, here are the specs. 3800sc. stock hp. camaro/firebird flywheel. new, uncut. .5" spacer tampa bay clutches disc $100. camaro/firebird pressure plate f40 trans/tob
you may be interested in the half inch spacer. it may prove to be an easy step for the diyer. the new f body flywheel is unchanged, take the 2.8 flywheel (which you hopefully still have) and remove the ring gear. then have it milled down to .5" i could have gone .02" thicker without hitting the tob fluid stem, if you have a thinner f body flywheel, you can go that much thicker on the spacer to try to make up the difference. the center then has to be cut out (on a lathe). cut it out to the same size as the inner diameter of your clutch disc material. or to the same size as the inner diameter of your f body flywheel. which ever is bigger. then drill out the PP holes in the 2.8 spacer to just big enough to clear some longer PP bolts. the spacing is the same as the f body, so just open the holes up big enough to get the bolt through, and yes, use a drill press. i think i am finding that this cheap solution is going to be just the right size. three machine operations, and the last should be a diyer
better solutions: well obviously the engine could use more hp the flywheel would be way better if you could just have an aluminum f body flywheel customized to .5" thicker. the tampa clutch was a bit small, and not rated for alot of hp.
promised drawings of my setup. too early to try to pitch these ideas. dang photobucket wont turn this sideways or resize these.
according to these drawings, i should have been just right on everything. the master to slave ratio (.42) should give me .42" of travel. i have 1" of master travel measured at the pushrod pivot. NOTE, this pivot has been moved and redone, the stock travel may be MORE. my travel should be plenty and too much, i will bleed as is, then add a pedal stop to maybe achieve .3" travel at the slave. still the best should be to get a smaller slave (just bigger than .250 bore) and have less effort at the pedal (or maybe shorter throw is the goal?)
i think my main problem was not having the system bled. probably could have avoided all this nonsense if i had bled better. (and as a side note, the culprit may be that i pumped the fluid out of the tob to measure full travel. there may have been air stuck in there.)
I've been considering taking my F-body flywheel and having the outer lip area the ring gear rests on turned down so that it will clear being mounted on top of the automatic flexplate for the starter. It depends on how much metal will have to be removed from the flywheel for proper clearance.
Another option would be to have a spacer made by having the flange end of an old 60 degree crank cut off and having the bolt pattern drilled in it and recessed for counter sinking hex head bolts to bolt it over and through the flexplate and then use the stock threaded holes in the top part of the flange to bolt the stock flywheel to.
So I recall seeing pictures of the necessary shifter modifications somewhere, but I can't seem to find them...anybody have them saved, or know where I might be able to find them? Also, those of us wish to modify the Getrag cables (two shifter, or selector...I can never remember), any pictures of the necessary mods there? I'm sure a lot of this will be obvious once I get a little further into this, but I'd just like to know if anybody has any pictures of said modifications or fresh fabrications they'd be willing to share.
Sorry to hear about your dilemma, credit V8 Archie for first mentioning that the Fiero MC would have to be limited in its travel or volume flow. Shortening the rod will change pedal position and you may not like that. That's why I chose the method I did until I have time to do something more professional. Check with Tampa Bay clutch as the last time I was there I saw some HTOBs on the shelf about 2 months ago. What did you come up with on the maximum travel length?
Interesting. Never heard that when I did my Archie 6-spd kit. My bleeding took 5 minutes. And is so easy to disconect when bringing engine down. I did notice that my pedal had an extremely high engagement on the new setup. I fixed that with Rodney's adjustable banjo. Had to adjust it all the way down (opposite of what people want when using it as a fix for low pedal) to get the engagement low where I like it.
Was just poking about GM Powertrain web site, and saw the specs for the new Chevy Cruze. Looks like it has two versions of the M32 6 speed manual standard, depending on engine. The gear ratios don't look very good if you want to attach it to anything other than a 4 cyl though.
I never got around to posting the modifications I made to the 4 speed shifter earlier. The final product will depend on which cables you use and your mount at the transmission. My modifications to the shifter were arrived at in reverse order if I recall correctly. I made an adjustable mount at the transmission first after connecting the cables to the shifter and measuring range of movement. The best approach would be to adjust the shifter to the bear minimum amount of detent-catch for reverse and with the shifer and transmission in the reverse position start from there. I started with the cheap Advance autoparts cables I had which didn't stand up to the turbo heat and were also not as rigid as a quality shift cable is. I also used the longer selector cables found on the Getrag instead of the Muncie 4 speed because I needed the extra cable length to clear some of the turbo madness under the deck lid.
Here they are:
The object is to increase the movement to the right as far as you can to make extra room for the 5-6 gate and make more room for movement to the left for reverse which I did here by grinding away metal at the base of the right side of the shifter.
Elongation of the limit slot for right and left movement
You may have to do a little modifying of the detent mechanism also.
As I mentioned earlier, some of my adjustments/mods were the result of my approach, you may not need to do this part. Now I recall what went wrong, I removed the shifters forward and aft stop and that allowed me to end up with the shifter moving too far forward. I made the mounts with that situation present and when I corrected it I wound up having to do this modification. If you follow the previously mentioned approach starting from reverse and moving toward the 5-6 gate you may be okay. I had to reposition the shift cable mount forward so that I could move the shifter backward some away from the radio in a more appropriate position.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 10-04-2010).]
OK Maybe I missed it among all the information. But Why not use the Stock 3.5/3.9 Flywheel for the swap? It should fit right up to Tranny and then you would use the Stock G6 Clutch and Pressure plate. Im I thinking too simple? It is because the bolt pattern is way off?
------------------
**************************************** Found a 88 formula Waiting to get a fence so I can re-home it There are Two kinds of Fiero's : Notchies and Donors!
[This message has been edited by Kento (edited 10-07-2010).]
Originally posted by Kento: OK Maybe I missed it among all the information. But Why not use the Stock 3.5/3.9 Flywheel for the swap? It should fit right up to Tranny and then you would use the Stock G6 Clutch and Pressure plate. Im I thinking too simple? It is because the bolt pattern is way off?
There is no stock 3.5 flywheel. The stock 3900 flywheel is not suitable for high torque applications above ~300 lb/ft. It is designed to slip at about 10% above its rating which at the moment is the 240 lb/ft the 3900 it's bolted to is supposed to produce. The HO version of the engine displayed at the 2006 SEMA show was rated at about 270 hp but only 259 lb/ft of torque. That's less than 10% above the base application's specs.
I have an extra G6 flywheel if you're looking to buy one. I just can't use it as is for my application expected to exceed 300 lb/ft by a good bit.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 10-07-2010).]
Originally posted by Joseph Upson: I have an extra G6 flywheel if you're looking to buy one. I just can't use it as is for my application expected to exceed 300 lb/ft by a good bit.
PM Sent
Also what advantage is there using the Intermediate shaft vs a single long one like the stock fiero?
[This message has been edited by Kento (edited 10-07-2010).]
I had the Camaro 3.4L flywheel outer diameter and ring gear step machined down. I honed out the Fiero ring gear by about .030 to keep .015 more on the seat which had to be cut down into the reliefs. I had to purchase 309 stainless steel MIG wire (expensive) to weld on the ring in the gaps spilling the weld over onto the land to help make it a complete circle again to resist collapsing. I had it balanced also. I probably could have had another .050 taken off the outer diameter. Hopefully I'll have it installed with the modified high clamp pressure plate Monday. If all goes as planned I'll be able to provide input on whether it's a success or fail. Othewise the staked G6 flywheel is working fine so far on test drives although its static condition allows for more noise from the F40. The car still pulls off as if it has a fully sprung hub although the tiny springs in the G6 clutch don't serve in that capacity.
Othewise the staked G6 flywheel is working fine so far on test drives although its static condition allows for more noise from the F40. The car still pulls off as if it has a fully sprung hub although the tiny springs in the G6 clutch don't serve in that capacity.
OK How much to make one like this?
------------------
**************************************** Found a 88 formula Waiting to get a fence so I can re-home it There are Two kinds of Fiero's : Notchies and Donors!
Originally posted by Kento: Also what advantage is there using the Intermediate shaft vs a single long one like the stock fiero?
The advantages aren't significant on a rear wheel drive, but here are the ones that I can think of:
- More efficient packaging for things like engine mounts and exhaust systems since you don't need to account for the space needed by the entire length of the axle as it moves through the suspension arc; - Evens out the torque steer forces side to side if your axles are angled. Now before everyone jumps on me, this is almost insignificant due to the fixed nature of the rear wheels in the steering axis, however there is always some deflection in the control arm bushings and in the case of '84-'87, the cradle bushings too; and - Using the F40, you may need a 1" longer passenger axle to make up the difference in the offset differential as compared to any of the stock Fiero transmissions.
Obivously the disadvantages are more significant like cost and complexity. But I still plan on using an intermediate shaft on my N* F40 for packaging reasons.
Originally posted by Kento: OK How much to make one like this?
Depends on your sources, resources and time.
FW $35 Industrial Machine shop; turning both stepped diameters down $90 Engine machine shop; balance and resurface $85. I could have saved $35 here had I thought to inquire about resurfacing from the guys above, or if I had asked these guys for a total price for all of the above. Spur of the moment decisions, followed by hind sight.
Stainless 309 MIG wire for the tack welds to cast iron, $30
Time spent painting and honing the internal ring diameter repeatedly to reach the desired diameter, heating in the oven to install, tack welding at 6 points, and grinding afterwards, about 3hrs. The right tools here can cut that down a good bit.
I don't have the best scale but I estimate weight loss to be near 4 lbs although the scale is suggesting closer to 6lbs. The start weight is about 19lbs.
This flywheel accepts the Fiero pressure plate. I purchased a new piece that started out with about 300lbs more clamping pressure (1957lbs) than the typical Fiero pressure plate then had it modified to 2357 lbs of clamping pressure. $176 with labor. The pressure plate alone was $57.
There is also the possibility of having the outer skirt diameter completely removed, cutting the surface down a bit more and putting it over an automatic flexplate.
Here are the new bolts, a whopping $13 from Summit. They are about 7/8" long.
- Evens out the torque steer forces side to side if your axles are angled. Now before everyone jumps on me, this is almost insignificant due to the fixed nature of the rear wheels in the steering axis, however there is always some deflection in the control arm bushings and in the case of '84-'87, the cradle bushings too; and
This is, AIUI, the primary reason the shaft was used on FRONT WHEEL DRIVE cars. The different angles that the CV joints had from side to side resulted in different "straightening forces" on each axle, the net of which fed back through the steering linkage as torque steer. By equalizing these forces, their net becomes zero and torque steer (from that effect) goes away. That does NOT mean that torque steer goes away, however. But remember, the above applies to a WWD (Wrong wheel drive) car. Either the intermediate shaft or the long axle both work fine in a Fiero, as long as your suspension bushings (poly/aluminum cradle) and powertrain mounts are in good condition.
The ARP bolts were too long which in a way is a good thing because it means they would be just right for another alternative approach to a flywheel for the F40, turning the outer ledge of the F-body flywheel down completely leaving only the surface necessary to mount the clutch and pressure plate and placing the assembly on top of an automatic flywheel for starting purposes.
I drove the car briefly with the staked OE dual mass flywheel (upper and lower plate locked together). The car pulled off fine, what I noticed was much more significant is the noise from the transmission. It is a good bit more noisy than it was before and the only thing that quiets it down while idling is putting a little pressure on the clutch pedal to bring the throwout bearing into contact with the pressure plate release springs or raising idle rpm to about 900.
This would have to be the reason some individuals state they don't have any unusual noise from their F40. It's either the second design or, there is a little contact with the pressure plate springs liking to that found with the Fiero trannies due to the slave cylinder pushing the throwout bearing forward, or higher than usual engine idle.
I should be able to test drive the car today with the modified F-body flywheel to see how it turns out.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 12-02-2010).]
So far the flywheel works great. I mentioned it above but to reiterate, you can save on expense and time by simply having a machine shop remove the outer skirt diameter of the flywheel and mounting it on top of an automatic flywheel. That would take a considerable amount of weight off the starting 19lbs and the end weight with the auto flywheel would still be lighter. You could also use a stock Fiero pressure plate with a Pontiac G6 or Ford Focus or Ranger clutch disc (the appropriate year is mentioned earlier in the thread).
I didn't inquire about how much was removed from my flywheel surface but I did notice with the pressure plate I ended up using I needed a little bit more throw which wasn't a problem because I had not mounted the clutch mastercylinder flush against the firewall on initial install pending making sure that doing so would not over-extend the throwout bearing. Now utilizing the remaining ~3/16" gap by tightning it down completely should provide the needed clearance plus a little reserve for normal operation. As it stands there is a slight forward movement when the tranny is placed in gear.
Could have sworn I posted this but I can't find it in either of the other two related threads I have. This is a comparison of the straps on the modified 1956 lb clamping force pressure plate on the left compared to the 4 spd fiero plate and then the 5 spd plate. The builder added an extra strap so it has 3 instead of 2 like the others. The clamping force as was mentioned earlier was bumped up to 2356 lbs. The stock plate used has a higher clamping force than the original Fiero plates by about 200 lbs and at its relatively low price is still a low cost upgrade. Something to consider as an alternative to other available units on the market that might not have performed to expectations.
do you have written data on the pressure plate clamp force? are you just guessing or pushing hearsay "my guy says this or says that" ?? can you provide proof of your statements? just need imperical data on this one...
do you have written data on the pressure plate clamp force? are you just guessing or pushing hearsay "my guy says this or says that" ?? can you provide proof of your statements? just need imperical data on this one...
do you have the brand name and part number for your pressure plate? can you provide a data sheet? what are the diaphram spring ratings? what is the strap thickness and rating? can we get the name and phone number so we can call the shop/guy for more information? others would benefit from imperical data on this i would think.
Hi, I am installing a 6 speed F40 on my 3.8SC Gen II fiero. Are the Saab 9-5 axles the same for their automatic and manual models, 4 cyl and V6?
Also, I went through all the pages of the thread and I still cant decide what Flywheel+clutch+pressure plate combination would be better. I bought a spec 3+ clutch+ pressure plate before because I wanted to but a getrag 5 speed, I guess that its useless now.
Thank you
[This message has been edited by Gohabs93 (edited 04-06-2011).]
Originally posted by Gohabs93: Hi, I am installing a 6 speed F40 on my 3.8SC Gen II fiero. Are the Saab 9-5 axles the same for their automatic and manual models, 4 cyl and V6?
Also, I went through all the pages of the thread and I still cant decide what Flywheel+clutch+pressure plate combination would be better. I bought a spec 3+ clutch+ pressure plate before because I wanted to but a getrag 5 speed, I guess that its useless now.
Thank you
I can't answer your question about the Saab axles and to my knowledge no one is bothering to attempt to use them given the boosted Saturn and Cobalt axles are a direct hookup at both ends for the Fiero F40 combo. I don't recall there being any clearance issues. There are other threads addressing what you are trying to accomplish that would be of more specific help regarding the clutch assembly.
Ok i will buy the 06 cobalt SS 5 speed axles. Do I get the intermediate shaft from the saab , G6 or Colbalt (I read in this thread that it is incompatible)?
Originally posted by Gohabs93: Ok i will buy the 06 cobalt SS 5 speed axles. Do I get the intermediate shaft from the saab , G6 or Colbalt (I read in this thread that it is incompatible)?
The passenger side axle is an assembly, the G6 intermediate shaft has male oriented ends, the others are male/female.
I'm experiencing an axle failure, with the characteristic clicking sound heard from a failing joint on a fwd car, accompanied by considerable vibration under light to greater load the following day after the car is driven hard, that smooths out presumably after the joint warms up. Not exactly sure why it does this but if the car is driven conservatively there is no problem the following morning when the car is driven, but go into boost a few times and the next morning it wobbles (feels like it) under load severe enough to shake me up and down in the seat but clears up at about the same point along the same route suggesting it is temperature sensitive.
Unfortunately, Moser racing cut the snap ring groove for the joint too deep and I didn't realize it until after I put the joint on, so except for an unusual stroke of luck, it is unlikely the snap ring used on the G6 joint bearing separator hub, will fall into centric position and allow the joint to be removed for disection, instead I'd probably have to use the plasma cutter to remove it which will destroy it.
Having little time and no idea when the joint will actually fail, I've come up with a plan as opposed to a Moser turnaround time and expense. Below is the axle shaft from a Fiero manual transmission, driverside. Manual is important because it is the heavy duty 32 spline blank shaft as opposed to the smaller spline count and axle from the auto tranny.
If I can bring the compressed axle length down by 1", by removing the joint inboard hub stops I should have the ideal length needed for a solution. I may be able to get about a half inch more compression from measurements but that should still be sufficient I hope, or else I'll have to dismantle the current axle some how in order to replace the joint.
If this works it will simplify the axle challenge some as the axles from the Cobalt SS up to 07 are too weak for my application given the SC Ecotec is breaking them and the combination of turbo torque and non stock shaft angle due to the car being lowered adds additional stress in my application. The excess ends on the shaft will have to be ground down to prevent contact with the joint cups.
Stop ring location of hubs.
Stop rings removed and location resulting, ~3/4" closer together, with ends needing to be ground down some.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 10-28-2012).]
Checked the interchange starting around 1990 and it appears the axle you're speaking of is shorter because it has a female inboard joint according to the picture shown and length of 20" 13/32.
Checked the interchange starting around 1990 and it appears the axle you're speaking of is shorter because it has a female inboard joint according to the picture shown and length of 20" 13/32.
Just in case anyone is looking for this information:
F40 transmission fluid: GM part # is 88862472 and I purchased 3 quarts from www.CrateEngineDepot.com for $72.70 shipped. The fill capacity was revised from 3 liters to 2.2 - 2.3 liters.
The fluid fill cap: GM part # is 22625354 and it is available from www.gmpartsgiant.com (one is in route to me, so eventually I will add a picture). Another option is to use a plug for an O2 sensor. I picked up a couple of stainless steel ones from ebay and they fit perfectly. I would recommend sliding an O-ring on it to help ensure a good seal, but they are quite plentiful.
