The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > 47 - Current classic GM Trucks > The 1947 - 1959 Chevrolet & GMC Pickups Message Board

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-12-2014, 07:48 PM   #1
truckeroy
Registered User
 
truckeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shelbyville, IL
Posts: 111
No clutch resistance

I have a 40 chevy truck with a 55 chevy truck engine in it. I also have an s10 5 spd attached to it. My problem is when I switched the 40 216 for the 235 out of the 55 truck, I now have no resistance to the clutch and pressure plate. Other than swap out the flywheel for the correct tooth count I put every thing back as it was before, including the spacer plate to mount things up properly. Any thoughts on what i did wrong? The throwout bearing is in correctly and sliding forward, but not engaging the pressure plate. I have adjusted the linkage to the max. With no return spring hooked up the clutch pedal will fall to the floor like it is not even hooked up. On my 64 I have plenty of adjustment, but on this truck, not much. I realize this 40 is a little out of the year range for this site, but it does have a 55 engine. Thanks, Roy
__________________
1948 Chevy 1/2T
1964 Chevy 1/2T stepside short bed
1939 Pontiac coupe Street Rod
2005 GMC 1/2T short bed
truckeroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 06:21 AM   #2
agnes the dog
Registered User
 
agnes the dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 272
Re: No clutch resistance

Did you trim the input shaft before installing the T5? Not sure if that could be causing your problem.

Also, are you sure that you are using the correct throwout bearing? Make sure to use the one for the transmission, not the engine. I had a similar issue when I installed my T5 behind a V8. My problem was the throwout bearing - it was about 1/2" thicker than necessary. I installed the wrong one (from the old 3 speed trans) and it was installed correctly with good movement. It was just too thick and wouldn't allow the clutch to engage properly.
__________________
Just because you can, doesn't necessarily mean you should.

1959 3100 stepside 355 + T5
agnes the dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 07:55 AM   #3
47 Fasttoys
Registered User
 
47 Fasttoys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Westminster, SC
Posts: 933
Re: No clutch resistance

It sounds to me like you have a case of the trans being to far away from the flywheel do to the spacer plate (adapter). As long as you have enough spline length on the input shaft you should be able to add a spacer to the clutch arm pivot point. For sure you need to insure the input shaft is fully engaged into the crankshaft bushing or bearing (you probably have a bushing).
Rob
__________________
My '47 C.O.E build
47 Fasttoys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 09:29 AM   #4
Speedbumpauto
Registered User
 
Speedbumpauto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 917
Re: No clutch resistance

In those days, there were three lengths of throw out bearings for chevys depending on flywheel/trans configuration. It appears your flywheel change required a change to a longer throw out bearing.
Speedbumpauto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 10:10 AM   #5
truckeroy
Registered User
 
truckeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shelbyville, IL
Posts: 111
Re: No clutch resistance

I just measured the flywheel thickness. It is the same as the one I took out. I used the same throwout bearing, clutch, spacer plate and pressure plate that was in the truck with the 216 engine. I can't see where the pedal can be installed incorrectly. I agree that it seems like there is not enough travel to engage the pressure plate, like the throw out bearing is too short, but I can't understand why it worked before? With the spacer plate, the nose of the trans fit into the bushing without cutting.
__________________
1948 Chevy 1/2T
1964 Chevy 1/2T stepside short bed
1939 Pontiac coupe Street Rod
2005 GMC 1/2T short bed
truckeroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 11:37 AM   #6
agnes the dog
Registered User
 
agnes the dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 272
Re: No clutch resistance

Any chance you could post some pictures? What bell housing did you use?
__________________
Just because you can, doesn't necessarily mean you should.

1959 3100 stepside 355 + T5
agnes the dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 11:44 AM   #7
Speedbumpauto
Registered User
 
Speedbumpauto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 917
Re: No clutch resistance

The thickness of the flywheel may be the same but how about the relationship of the crankshaft mounting flange to the clutch face? That's where the difference usually happens.
Speedbumpauto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 11:45 AM   #8
agnes the dog
Registered User
 
agnes the dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 272
Re: No clutch resistance

I'm not all that familiar with the '40 style clutch linkage. If you disconnect your linkage from the clutch pivot arm, will the throwout bearing come into contact with the pressure plate? If you do have enough movement in the clutch arm when the linkage is disconnected (and not enough when it's connected), you may need to modify your clutch linkage. Just tossing out ideas....
__________________
Just because you can, doesn't necessarily mean you should.

1959 3100 stepside 355 + T5
agnes the dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2014, 12:57 PM   #9
truckeroy
Registered User
 
truckeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shelbyville, IL
Posts: 111
Re: No clutch resistance

The original 40 flywheel crankshaft mounting surface is 1/4" below the outside (tooth side) of the flywheel. I don't have another 41-54 flywheel like the one installed in the truck, so I can't measure the difference unless I remove it from the truck (which I probably will to solve this. HA). If someone has one and can take this measurement, I would appreciate it. I do have a 59 fw from a car that measures the same in all ways except for tooth count and bore dia. of the 40 fw. not that this helps, but it tells me they were made similar for many years, I guess. I have to assume it is something I did during assembly that is screwed up. I hate to take it back apart, especially since it is back in the truck, but that's my kind of luck. I just had to replace the trans in my 64 from under the truck, so I guess I am experienced. I was hoping for a solution that didn't involve that, but not with my luck. I'm using the stock bell housing and pedal as. and a 41-54 flywheel to get the larger bore and tooth count. The truck starts and runs fine just won't engage clutch. The linkage adjustment is a hook eye with threads on the end. The total length of threads is 2" max and I'm at the end now with almost no engagement. I don't know if I could back out the pivot ball for the fork to get some extra pivot distance or not.
__________________
1948 Chevy 1/2T
1964 Chevy 1/2T stepside short bed
1939 Pontiac coupe Street Rod
2005 GMC 1/2T short bed
truckeroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com