Yes, your interpretation of my explanation is correct. The hole drilled for
the fork taper pin was drilled a few degrees off. Sorry, I am not the best
at explaining the technical details, but keep trying to improve. I am still
using the shaft since I didn't have another one handy as couldn't leave the
car apart at my friend's garage long enough to order another. I am going
to call Moss Motors Monday and explain the situation to them. I am sure
they will say please return for a refund, but hopefully they can investigate
their inventory for a potential problem. Thanks for the tip on the slave
cylinder, that makes perfect sense. Hopefully, the slight angle that the
push rod is installed off center won't ruin too quickly. It's a new slave
cylinder also.
JIm
75 TR6
80 TR7
Kissimmee, Florida
Sally or Dick Taylor wrote:
> Jim---I just installed a new clutch shaft from Moss (and is part of a
> much longer story for a later time) and it seems to be correct. Now back
> to what you found, as I don't understand exactly where the mistake was,
> or what you have done to get around it. The 'three holed' arm, when
> welded to the shaft, should have the tapered bore for the fork pin
> directly in line (vertically) with each other. Are you saying it was off
> a few degrees, thereby causing the rotation of the fork/throwout bearing
> to be 'late' in contacting the clutch?
>
> Are you now still using the same questionable shaft but using a
> different hole?
>
> Using a 'hole' that doesn't line up straight with the Slave Cylinder
> will slightly decrease the life/bore of the SC due to side loads
> imparted.
>
> What does MossM have to say about all of this?
>
> I am Very interested in such escapades!
>
> Dick T.
--
Jim Henningsen
email:jdhenn@cfl.rr.com
|