Might have to give up on Hydraulic clutch...Unless there are any ideas!?!?

[crzyamerican]

Ok. So I made what now seems like a stupid mistake. I planned on the hydraulic clutch with T5 I got out of a 94 Mustang GT. Long story short...I got the T5 installed with no problems. Bought Master, Slave etc. I have a braket to mount the slave made like dazecars.com early brakets.

Today after doing some rust repair with a friend, i decided to crawl under the car and pre-fit the slave...I noticed something i had never even thought to check or even paid attention to. The clutch fork is not in the same position as all the other T5's I have seen write ups on. I dont have a pic but here is a pic I found while searching for a fix. It is a user named wicked93gs. My clutch fork is in the same position.



The fork is in a position more like 7-8 oclock rather than more of 9 oclock. So the bracket mounting spot is no where close to the fork.

I might have to sell my setup and go with cable which I really dont want to do.

Any thoughts?

[jmd66fb]

Looks like you have the 94-95 bellhousing with the different fork position.
Im not sure, but cant you just swap out your bell housing for the correct 1983-1993 bell housing?
Looks like their pretty easy to find:
1983-93 Mustang Ford Racing T5 Bellhousing, M-6392-E at LRS - Same Day Shipping!
87-93 Ford Mustang OEM Factory T5 Trans Bellhousing 302 - eBay (item 180610396402 end time Feb-07-11 18:03:27 PST)
83-93 Ford Mustang GT 5.0 T5 Bellhousing - eBay (item 180532748999 end time Feb-08-11 10:47:32 PST)

Heres a pic of the right bell


Joe

[crzyamerican]

Thanks for the input jmd66fb. Its a great Idea but I would then also have to replace the input shaft since the 94-95 Bellhousing and input shaft are .76" longer than the earlier ones. I was hoping somone else might have already come up with a different way to mount the slave.
I'm not sure but I dont think the pull Salve "that would mont where the cable goes" would work due to my tri-y headers.

[jmd66fb]

Another idea..keep the trans but replace the bell housing with the right pre-94 unit to place the lever at 9 o'clock. Instead of changing the input shaft on the trans, mount a Modern Driveline "Spacer plate, 93 T-5 bellhousings to fit 94-95 V8 T-5" Stock# MD-514-8609
$180. Modern Driveline, Inc. - Adapters Its a 5/8" plate to adapt 95 trans to pre-94 bellhousing.
Also: http://dazed.home.bresnan.net/test "SS Hydraulic Clutch Pushrod" for custom length.

Joe

[ScottsGT]

Or just go with a hydraulic throwout bearing.

[crzyamerican]

Thanks Joe & ScottsGT, I will keep those both in mind. I didn't think of the spacer. Does the hydraulic throwout bearing require a new inputshaft bearing retainer? I just bought and installed a new steel ford racing retainer.

I should have been more specific in my original post. I would prefer to use all or most of what I have. I also dont want to pull the trans again. If it comes to that I think I would sell the parts I have now and purchase a cable kit. I'll do some more searching.

[F15Falcon]

You can change the input shaft on your '94 tranny with an input shaft from an earlier T-5, and then use the early bell housing with the fork in the correct position. You can get new input shafts on Ebay pretty reasonable. Changing an input shaft is a bolt on project, you don't have to dis-assemble the tranny to do it.

[buening]

Are there two fork ball stud bosses on the front case of the trans? I would think that moving the clutch fork from the 7 to the 9 o'clock position would require the ball stud to be relocated. It may not be as simple as a bellhousing swap.

[Roddster]

You guys worry me. Ever hear of a clutch explosion? You all ought to using a Lakewood Bellhousing if you like to walk. OK, even then, you will have to drill a 1 1/2" hole to fit the slave cylinder in.

[ScottsGT]

Originally Posted by Roddster

You guys worry me. Ever hear of a clutch explosion? You all ought to using a Lakewood Bellhousing if you like to walk. OK, even then, you will have to drill a 1 1/2" hole to fit the slave cylinder in.

Yea, on a 500+ HP engine. How may stock or slightly modified cars have you seen this problem on? If it was a real problem, don't you think FOMOCO would have installed scattershields from the factory. If it was a real problem, don't you think feds would have mandated a safety recall?

[ScottsGT]

Originally Posted by buening

Are there two fork ball stud bosses on the front case of the trans? I would think that moving the clutch fork from the 7 to the 9 o'clock position would require the ball stud to be relocated. It may not be as simple as a bellhousing swap.

The ball stud clutch fork pivot boss is in the bellhousing, not on the trans.

[ScottsGT]

Originally Posted by crzyamerican

Thanks Joe & ScottsGT, I will keep those both in mind. I didn't think of the spacer. Does the hydraulic throwout bearing require a new inputshaft bearing retainer? I just bought and installed a new steel ford racing retainer.

I should have been more specific in my original post. I would prefer to use all or most of what I have. I also dont want to pull the trans again. If it comes to that I think I would sell the parts I have now and purchase a cable kit. I'll do some more searching.

Sorry, forgot to answer your question....
Honestly, I don't think you have to swap the input shaft retainer, but you better call the mfgr. to make sure. It's a $360 fix though....
Modern Driveline - Hydraulics
You might be able to find it for less if you look around. I've not researched this part of my build yet, though I am going in this direction.

[billywatson1205]

The 2005-up Mustang V6 uses the internal slave throw-out.
More Information for DORMAN CS650109

I just wonder how you could adapt this to work on the older t5's? The input shaft is the same (I think), I'm sure it's a different length though. I wonder what bearing retainer has to be used and what other parts are involved for the slave to work in our application. The internal slave for the 05's is roughly 100 bucks.
Bill

[buening]

Originally Posted by ScottsGT

Yea, on a 500+ HP engine. How may stock or slightly modified cars have you seen this problem on? If it was a real problem, don't you think FOMOCO would have installed scattershields from the factory. If it was a real problem, don't you think feds would have mandated a safety recall?

Agree, if this is a fun car that won't see high RPMs or high horsepower, clutch explosion risk is very minimal. Unless he plans on racing the car or beating the crap out of it on the street I'd just stick with the regular bellhousing. The newer cars like Cobra/Shelby's don't have steel bellhousings, and they most likely have more HP than the PO does.

[buening]

Originally Posted by ScottsGT

The ball stud clutch fork pivot boss is in the bellhousing, not on the trans.

You are correct. If this were the T56 it would have been a different story, as the midplate would have needed a change