 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / August 2007Clutch Upgrade
It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have needed repairs I have to get done, I try to see what performance I can add on, with the same labor bill. I'll definitely get the rear main seal replaced as preventive maintenance, because each Fox-body 5.0 I have owned has developed problems there, and the same labor as the clutch will expose the seal. I've seen 'performance clutches' in the catalogs. What exactly does this upgrade get me? My guess is that if you have pro - level horsepower, it'll grab better. I'm trying to build this car to be a resto-mod, impressive street car (ie same rotating assembly, same block / heads, no power - adders). Would there be a benefit to a 'high performance' clutch? And is there anything else I could add in, that would share the labor bill (maybe an aluminum / lighter flywheel)? > I'll definitely get the rear main > seal replaced as preventive maintenance, because each Fox-body 5.0 I > have owned has developed problems there, and the same labor as the > clutch will expose the seal. Where did you get that idea? To service the rear main seal you need to remove the oil pan. Has very little to do with the clutch. Al > > I'll definitely get the rear main > > seal replaced as preventive maintenance, because each Fox-body 5.0 I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Al I'm about half a do-it-myself-er, and the rear main on the other cars was a job I paid my mechanic to do, so maybe I'm wrong. If you can get to it from the oil pan, I'll do it myself next time. I'm pretty sure the Haynes book and the Ford Service Manual each start with 'remove the transmission'. Also, I thought the seal was on the vertical face of the block, behind the flywheel, where the output shaft comes out of the block. Is this right? My thinking went that they'll have to separate the motor and trans, so the seal would be (very nearly) exposed. >>> I'll definitely get the rear main >>>seal replaced as preventive maintenance, because each Fox-body 5.0 I [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > they'll have to separate the motor and trans, so the seal would be > (very nearly) exposed. The 89 5.0 uses a one-piece seal. You do have to remove the transmission, clutch and flywheel, but not the oil pan. I did mine about eight years ago. I really couldn't remember if I had to remove the oil pan, so I checked the manual. Not counting the time to remove & replace the tranny (mine is an AOD) it took about ten minutes to remove the old seal and install the new one. With the proper installation tool, which I didn't have, it should go even quicker. In other words, don't let the mechanic charge more than a few bucks to change it for you. While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts and transmission mount. You definitely feel a lot more vibration in the car, but the throttle response is unbelievable! You should definitely check the engine and tranny mounts on a car that old. Arlie 1989 Mustang LX 5.0 1992 Thunderbird LX 5.0 > While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts and > transmission mount. You definitely feel a lot more vibration in the > car, but the throttle response is unbelievable! You should definitely > check the engine and tranny mounts on a car that old. What's the connection between throttle response and solid motor mounts? Richard >> While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts and >> transmission mount. You definitely feel a lot more vibration in the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Richard The flex between the engine and "frame" is eliminated, all the energy is going to spinning the driveshaft, not "absorbing vibration"... I would not do this modification on a street car with a stock motor. It would be silly. >>> While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts and >>> transmission mount. You definitely feel a lot more vibration in the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I would not do this modification on a street car with a stock motor. It > would be silly. you can misalign the driveshaft to clutch as the solids drop the motor about 1 1/2 to 2 inches. the angle needs to be about 2 degrees or less, else you could get driveshaft vibration at higher speeds somewhere it says to hard mount the tranny to avoid problems when going solid mounts >>>>While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts and >>>>transmission mount. You definitely feel a lot more vibration in the [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > somewhere it says to hard mount the tranny to avoid problems when going > solid mounts Richard is exactly right, no energy lost to the rubber mounts. My engine is basically stock, but I did it for autocrossing. It helped a lot when getting back on the gas into a straight after a sharp corner. I don't remember what brand mine are, but they are the same height as the original mounts. And remember, mine is an automatic, so I have no idea how they may affect a manual tranny/clutch. Arlie >>>>>While I was working down there, I installed new (solid) motor mounts >>>>>and [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Arlie I have solids in mine now,they are a little shorter, the fan blade is lower about 1/2 inch (shroud is eating tip of blades, but old "aged" stock mounts will do that too) . But you sure can tell the difference, the engine doesn't twist like on stock mounts. But I have a driveshave vibration now around 70 mph, goes away when the clutch is not engaged, 60 and 80 mph are fine, have new tires. 93 5.0. > It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX > convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > And is there anything else I could add in, that would share the labor > bill (maybe an aluminum / lighter flywheel)? Just bought a CenterForce II for my '71 Grande' M-code. At $325 for the kit (bearing, disc and clutch kit) it is bit pricey but a big jump from the factory model. Check mustangdepot.com for your car. > > It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX > > convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Sounds good - but what does it do for you? That is, how is the car behave differently with the Centerforce as opposed to the OEM clutch? >> Just bought a CenterForce II for my '71 Grande' M-code. >> At $325 for the kit (bearing, disc and clutch kit) it is bit [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Sounds good - but what does it do for you? That is, how is the car > behave differently with the Centerforce as opposed to the OEM clutch? Probably not much different at this point. But I am considering replacing the Carter AFB with a Barry Grant Demon and possibly a Paxton blower down the road. Just planning ahead. The clutch is worn and needs replacing anyway. >> > It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX >> > convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Sounds good - but what does it do for you? That is, how is the car > behave differently with the Centerforce as opposed to the OEM clutch? Well if you don't have enough horsepower to SLIP the stock clutch, not much aside from changing your drivability... The Centerforce clutches will grab harder, and not slip. > It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX > convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > And is there anything else I could add in, that would share the labor > bill (maybe an aluminum / lighter flywheel)? Less dead weight that the motor needs to put into motion is good for quicker take offs. So yes to aluminum flywheel and drive shaft also. A hi-po clutch will hold better under higher torque strains. Oh and with the lighter flywheel you need to rev a bit higher to take off because of the lower inertia, Depending on how much lower end torque you have.  SignatureTropic Green Y2K Mustang GT W/bits & pieces http://tinyurl.com/yjdb66 >> It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX >> convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > because of the lower inertia, Depending on how much lower end torque you > have. Basically none of those items are worth the expense with a stock engine... >>> It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX >>> convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Basically none of those items are worth the expense with a stock engine... agreed. >>>> It looks like I'll be replacing my clutch sometime soon (89 5.0 LX >>>> convertible, 5 spd, of course - about 110k mi). Usually when I have [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > agreed. Yeah I take that back too then. Didn't quite get what the OP has planed for the motor. SignatureTropic Green Y2K Mustang GT W/bits & pieces http://tinyurl.com/yjdb66
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.