I have an interesting problem, I put together my clutch, bellhousing and transmission on my 396 and I do not have any free travel in the fork. Here are some specifics...621 bellhousing, new GM clutch fork, new clutch and pressure plate, new short throw out bearing. It looks to me like the stud for the fork needs to be backed out of the bellhousing some. Are these adjustible??

Thanks in advance!

I'm guessing the clutch fork is binding on the throwout bearing.

The first time I installed mine, I didn't have the fork properly positioned in the retaining tabs or "ears" on the throwout bearing. This caused the fork to bind, and not give me any free travel.

I doubt the ball stud could be positioned in our out too far to cause your problem. It will give the bearing more throw if you adjust it out, but the other end of the fork would have to interfere with something before you would lose free play.

Sucks, but I think you will have to take the tranny off, and check to see if you have the throwout bearing and clutch fork mated together right.

I think I remember it was something I could not fix until I separated the tranny from the engine.

Hope this helps.
Dave

Is it possible that this problem is caused by the throw out bearing binding on the nose of the transmission? I am having a similar problem with the clutch being too tight. In my case, I know that the bearing is installed correctly on the fork.

According to the responses I got to a question I posted a few days ago, the throwout bearing CAN get hung up or bind on the nose of the transmission.
http://www.chevelles.com/forum/Forum9/HTML/009519.html

How do you correct the bearing binding on the transmission nose problem?

I usually put a little grease on the trans snout and some inside the bearing. Unless you have some burrs or something, this should work.

chris

This is a scan from the centerforce instructions on Throw-out Bearing Installation (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/bowt_to_bearing.jpg). Hope that helps.


------------------
Ron Cook TC Gold #1276 ___ ACES #5136
1969 300 Deluxe HTSS396 (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/bow_tied4.jpg) The L35-325HP 396cid (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/bow_tied3.jpg) 69 Memory Lane (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/bow_tied.jpg) 1971 Malibu 2DR HT (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/bow_tied_71Malibu.jpg)
CanAm Chevelle Club (http://www.canamchevelles.com) _____________"Take my advice, I'm not using it."

The initial problem described in this post is basically same situation i described in a post i made a few minutes ago. (621 bell as well) In my case, it definitely ain't binding on transmission since it's still on the floor.

Is it possible that a Centerforce Dual Friction is simply a lot thicker/deeper than stock and I'm running out of room in there?

Any Centerforce tech reps in Team Chevelle?

Man, there should be, we all just about, run their clutches!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Is it possible that a Centerforce Dual Friction is simply a lot thicker/deeper than stock and I'm running out of room
in there?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Centerforce specifies a distance for the fork pivotball, relative to the back of the block, and also requires a flywheel with stock specs / thickness relative to crank flange. Either a stock GM or Centerforce flywheels will work, but some of the other aftermarket flywheels are "thicker" (such as the Hays, etc).

Are you running a stock flywheel?

There are adjustable pivotballs available from Lakewood...

------------------

"Once you go RAT, you never go back..."
TC #1366
Tony
The Chevelle (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleA.jpg)
Dual Quad 396 (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleC.jpg)
Side View (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleD.jpg)

The dimension for the pivot ball is not something that should change. The ball is fixed at a height, Lakewood has one for the blow shield as does GM for the stock bell housing. I have never seen the tickness change on a flywheel, no matter who makes it.

------------------
www.muncie4speed.com (http://www.muncie4speed.com)
Gold 67
A.C.E.S. 5602
M.C.C. 559
1967 Malibu, 2nd owner.
1971 Malibu, new rat is in. It's the details that take the time!
There is nothing like rowing through the gears at 7500. Stick cars are so much fun they should be a controlled substance!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have never seen the tickness change on a flywheel, no matter who
makes it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know the Hays and probably other aftermarket flywheels have a different dimension from the crank flange to the friction surface of the flywheel...

I tried to install a Hays Flywheel with a different brand clutch disc and the flywheel bolts hit the center-hub springs of the disc...

I did some research with the clutch companies, and it turned out that the stock GM flywheel has a deeper step between the crank flange and the friction surface. It turned out that the disc I had was for a Stock GM flywheel, and when installed with the stock GM flywheel, the springs did not hit the bolt heads (same exact bolts)...

I heard from Centerforce that their flywheels are similar in dimension to stock GM...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The dimension for the pivot ball is not something that should change. The ball is fixed at a height, Lakewood has one for the
blow shield<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the Lakewood one is adjustable...

I agree that the pivot ball is not used to adjust the clutch, but the proper height is required for proper geometry and release operation/longevity, and therefore, it needs adjustability for best setup.

Either the Lakewood or the Centerforce literature even states to check and verify the dimension between the back of the block and the pivot ball.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>some of the other
aftermarket flywheels are "thicker" (such as the Hays, etc)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, This should have said "thinner", not thicker... And I had that "thinner" in quotes, because the flywheel itself might be the same thickness, but I was talking relative to the crank flange...

------------------

"Once you go RAT, you never go back..."
TC #1366
Tony
The Chevelle (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleA.jpg)
Dual Quad 396 (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleC.jpg)
Side View (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleD.jpg)

[This message has been edited by 1966_L78 (edited 01-22-2003).]

I had one of those miserables Hays flywheels for a 400 in a Blazer. I had to machine the step deeper to clear the clutch springs. That is just plain stupid, or smart, depends or your perspective. Hays loves it, can't use anything but there stuff, pisses of customers.

------------------
www.muncie4speed.com (http://www.muncie4speed.com)
Gold 67
A.C.E.S. 5602
M.C.C. 559
1967 Malibu, 2nd owner.
1971 Malibu, new rat is in. It's the details that take the time!
There is nothing like rowing through the gears at 7500. Stick cars are so much fun they should be a controlled substance!

Maybe it is only the Hays...

I tried to get a Cheap, new flywheel, and thats what Summit has for like $190...

I lost a few years of my life thanks to the stress they caused me... Even after I called them, the phone tech still could figure the problem ("doesn't say anything in the catalogue")... They didn't want to refund my money at first becaise it was installed (but never run)... Finally, they made it right for me...



------------------

"Once you go RAT, you never go back..."
TC #1366
Tony
The Chevelle (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleA.jpg)
Dual Quad 396 (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleC.jpg)
Side View (http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/1966_L78/ChevelleD.jpg)