73s30t Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Did a search and didn't find much, maybe my phrasing was wrong. L28et with a 240mm clutch set running with a s130 n/a 5 speed and an adjustable slave. I know the part numbers are the same for the throw out bearing but can I retain the n/a sleeve? I have been getting very mixed answers. A friend of mine says the slightly longer n/a sleeve is fine as he has done it. Others are arguing with me the bearing part numbers are different, I looked myself and they seem to be the same. Some are saying it HAS to be the shorter turbo/2+2 sleeve. Zcar says this, ratsun says another etc... I have both the short and long sleeve. The new bearing is on the long though so if I can just leave that alone great. If not though much better to find out now then after I drop the set in this weekend. Does anyone have any 1st hand experience or a 100% solid answer they could throw my way? It would be appreciated. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 A collar that is too long can be compensated for by adjusting the slave rod approximately 1/4" shorter. A collar that is to short may run out of rod length, or throw in the bellhousing opening to adequately release the clutch at some point. As your girlfriend once said: "Longer is Better" I made the mistake of a too-long collar and simply was too lazy to take the tranny back down...that's when I found out the 91 240SX Slave Rod is considerably shorter than the one I had in the 280Z...and since I had already cut down my old 280 rod...they looked identical, so there are two options. Adjustable rod makes this one a no-brainer, go long, adjust shorter if you have to. Likely 5mm (1/4") will get the clutch engaged so you can move the car. Too long collar results in a clutch that will not engage, and the car will not move. Too short a collar results in an inability to get into gear, or start the car in gear. (Clutch disc always partially clamped by pressure plate, even with pedal all the way to the floor.) Hope that clears the logic behind what you have in front of you. Good Luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I'm running a 240 on my na 83zx with no problems I got the beck arnely clutch assmbly from shuck/orilly, perfect fit. Stock 240 flywheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
280z-racer Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 I'm running a 240 on my na 83zx with no problemsI got the beck arnely clutch assmbly from shuck/orilly, perfect fit. Stock 240 flywheel. i had to use the 240 setup on my centerforce clutch. seems to work ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted November 8, 2009 Share Posted November 8, 2009 Mine work out fine, however, I can not figure out why others are having problems, so my comments at this moment are only for MY car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayolives Posted November 8, 2009 Share Posted November 8, 2009 Mixing and matching t/o bearing related parts is a crap shoot. Stick with one set up and the matching part numbers from Nissan for that set up and you can't go wrong. Do it correct the first time and be done with it. This is by far easier than needing to pull the gear box out again to correct a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted November 8, 2009 Share Posted November 8, 2009 I would also state that unclear statements will cloud this issue even more... For instance, for woldson's comments, if you read it all, it appears he is talking about a 240mm setup. But if someone misses that point, and reads his later comments about using a '240 flywheel' it can easily be misconstrued as 240Z and not 240mm. Since most talk about the 240(Z) flywheel is lighter, and desirable for performacne applications, one could question what is being said, or take the wrong impression away. Semantics? Sure... But you can send people off in the wrong direction by simple omissions like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 Point taken, guess it is easy to figure that you are talking to someone like myself and not clarify. 240mm turbo/2+2 flywheel, with beck arnly matching 240mm clutch disk (w/springs unfortunately;)) and pressure plate and throw out bearing, mounted on the collar of said vehicle, using same clutch fork of said vehical. Some of that is just for comical relief, I did get the point . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 Mixing and matching t/o bearing related parts is a crap shoot. Stick with one set up and the matching part numbers from Nissan for that set up and you can't go wrong. Do it correct the first time and be done with it. This is by far easier than needing to pull the gear box out again to correct a problem. It is Hybrid Z, some of the mixing is been incredible. I.E. maxima cranks in f54 blocks, l24 rods, flat top pistons in turbo engines with (of all things) p79 heads! Elusive special cams that can be used as well as hard tapped cam in converted hydraulic head ect..etc. My set up worked the first time without a hitch. I'm really stumped why this is problematic to some. If what I did was in some way a very simple solution to an on going problem then, fantastic, for the amount I've gained here pales in what I contributed. I truly am scratching my head on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 Yeah, the problematic issue... That's why I kept it to the theory behind the parts. If you can understand this, you can figure it out---or at least get a direction on which way you need to go to fix it. One of the issues is people using different terminology across platforms (S30/S130) where one kind uses 240mm flywheels and one kind uses 225mm flywheels. I have NEVER liked people using '2+2 Clutch Assembly' for that reason. Really you need to know 240mm or 225, and 'early or late' within those parameters. Is the 240mm coupe a different cover and bearing assembly from a 2+2 240mm assembly? See where that is going? S30 2+2's run 240mm? Or do they run 225mm with heavier clutch covers? It's all confusing when you start using terminology that can be misinterpreted. The problem really comes down to the CLUTCH COVER USED and then the DIAMETER. Once you narrow down those two things, you find the selection of parts is narrowed considerably. Me? I stick 1978 280Z 225mm Components from a 'five speed' in everything, and vary clutch cover weights and clutch facing composition. I haven't really found a need for 240mm components yet, but I've limited RWHP (turbocharged) to no more than 350 in 240 Coupes. Maybe the 260Z 2+2 at 2600# will need more, but I've still got clamping force and clutch facing in reserve... That decision has kept me out of this mess for quite a while. And gives my kid plenty of 240Z clutch components for his L20B 510 Wagon. For which he likely is now set for life with my take-offs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 Thanks for the clarity Tony:)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.