Cascade Crew

Twilightoptics · Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:16 pm Post subject: Stupid clutches

So the Camaro clutch doesn't fit the S10 mechanical bellhousing.

Greatttttttttt.

The fingers are way too tall. I can't even get the bellhousing on without depressing the fingers on the clutch fork.

Apparently there is a low diaphram and a high diaphram. This must be the low one.

I guess I'll have to buy a clutch. Oh Goodie.

Tony, where did you get your basic kit before the spec. I don't have the dough for a spec right now.

Twilightoptics · Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:27 pm Post subject:

So spec has one offered with the low diaphragm. Autozone kinda has one. Napa doesn't list anything.

I wonder if the flywheel height changed.

Travis, do you know what year that trans/bellhousing came from?

blue89 · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:46 am Post subject:

I think it was an 84 S10. It had a carbed 2.8 so that must have been it. Either 84 or 82. It had the older dash and all that. We converted it to auto just for something to do.

rjmcgee · The Hammer Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 2328

Paul, I have a mech bellhousing from that 83 V6 bird that I took mudding. I can toss it in a box and send it your way if it will help.

Dewey316 · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:26 am Post subject:

You might see if you can get Napa to pull a flywheel for a f-body, and then one for an early S10, to see if they are diffrent.

Ohh, yeah, if you are still look for radiator stuff, I think I have a couple of spare audi radiators, you cal always look thru them and see if one will fit.

--John

91RSVert · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:34 am Post subject:

blue89 · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:13 am Post subject:

Just asked my brother (owner of the tranny)

83 was the year.

Twilightoptics · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:52 am Post subject:

'83 it is.

As for the flywheel... judging by tony's pictures and what he told me in person.... the early 2.8 maro wheels and the later 2.8 wheels are the same except one has a weight.

I'm thinking of hitting a JY to find out with the same bellhousing and just pull the pressure plate for now. I can verify the flywheel too while there

Then I can get mobile and get a spec clutch later.

blue89 · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:59 am Post subject:

Yes. Pre 86 2.8's have a weighted flywheel (externally balanced). Post 86 are nuetral (internally balanced). The exact crossover date is unclear as I think GM used up old stock before switching over.

Is your engine pre/post 86? You should be able to make a weighted flywheel nuetrally balanced so it will work on a post 86 engine.

Twilightoptics · Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:09 pm Post subject:

The engine is an '89 so it's internally balanced.

If Tony is right, the flywheels are the same except for the weight... so I wouldn't need to change flywheels. The low diaphragm pressure plate should bolt right up.

Build a bracket for the clutch cable and I'm back in business. Hopefully.

Twilightoptics · Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:55 pm Post subject:

A quick afternoon trip to the JY revealed THIS:

Yeah I guess that's why the fingers "stuck up too high."
Glad i didn't just go buy a clutch because the flywheel is totally different too. Too bad it's not a massive weight savings as the taller camaro flywheel is all hollow in the back.

Now I need to figure out how to make it neutral balance. Hopefully i should just be able to grind the weight pad off the back, but I'll go talk to my machine shop guys and see what they have to say. I have no idea if the later S-10 "neutral" motors have thick or thin flywheels. Either way, I have this one now.

The S-10 has a 1/2" larger clutch disc! WOOT!

Other progress. Got all the bracketry fabbed up and the motor in the car. News is I can get to all the trans stuff from underneath. Just the usual tilt it back a bit.

Frankenstein attacked my old sending unit!

Twilightoptics · Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:01 pm Post subject:

So comcast changed all their setting. I have to go make the pictures I upload "public" now. Not sure how to do that just yet.

aaron_sK · Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:29 pm Post subject:

Maybe just transfer Photobucket or something like that. Probably easier than "Comcastic".

Twilightoptics · Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:13 am Post subject:

Well on Napa and Autozone's site... it looks like an '83 flywheel and '88 flywheel are the same thickness. Might head back out to the boneyard and pull another trans and exchange flywheel's with em.

Would be easier than hacking this one up in "hopes."

Twilightoptics · Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:23 am Post subject:

Hmmm partsamerica has a new flywheel for $34.... that might be the best route yet. They say the core casting must be the same but the guys at schmucks are just that.

Maybe I'll give that a go.

blue89 · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:13 am Post subject:

I've never seen that before. Good job so far! What ECM do you intend to run?

Twilightoptics · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:14 am Post subject:

Commander 950

Quasi-Traction · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:20 am Post subject:

Knowing how pressed you are for free time lately paul, I'm continually impressed with the progress!

I have some practically brand new 7mm Taylor plug wires for a 60 degree V6 if you want em. Only had em on my old 84 for like a week.

Twilightoptics · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:20 am Post subject:

Cool.

Went to the JY today. No '88 models with a 5speed but there was a 4x4 from '87. So I ripped the tcase and trans and all that jive out... and found a weight on the back of the flywheel.

Then discovered all I really had to do was pull the 4 bolts for the dust cover, pull the starter.... and turn the motor over by hand to see the back of the flywheel Rolling Eyes

Guess thursday when I get paid I'll be off to schmucks to see if I can con them out of using this flywheel as a core.