C3 Hydraulic Clutch Conversion Experiences

Fuelie74

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
770
Location
Monroe, WI
For those people that have converted to a hydraulic clutch what set up did you use, are you happy with it, and what would you do different? Also is the feel of it really that much better/different than the old rod and Zbar setup when it is working right? I am getting ready to put a GM T5 in my 74 Vette in place of the TH400. I am leaning towards a Chevy truck master and a Howe hydraulic TOB.
 
I would like to use the Howe hydraulic TOB but I have a TKO 500 and (I think) only the Mcleod ($$$$$) will work. The Howe TOB may need a 3/4 bore master like a Wilwood and the Chevy truck unit is 11/16 so you might have problems there.
 
Yeah the Howe calls for a 3/4" master cylinder. Will 1/16" make that big of a difference? I know it would require longer pedal travel but, it would also make for less pedal effort.

Is there any reason other then price you would like to run a Howe?

In the instructions it says this "Use this throw-out bearing with a stock clutch only, a racing clutch will cause damage" Should I be worried about that?
 
Yeah the Howe calls for a 3/4" master cylinder. Will 1/16" make that big of a difference? I know it would require longer pedal travel but, it would also make for less pedal effort.

Is there any reason other then price you would like to run a Howe?

In the instructions it says this "Use this throw-out bearing with a stock clutch only, a racing clutch will cause damage" Should I be worried about that?

The pedal travel for the truck master will be 20% more with 20% less effort. If you can get enough travel (at the TOB) with the smaller diameter master you should be good. Just can't say for certain.

I would like to run a hydraulic TOB just because it eliminates all friction from linkages and pivots (the external slave does not).

I can't answer the racing clutch question. I don't know why it would cause damage. Maybe someone knows the answer?
 
I assume you read my thread on the conversion, the master cylinder is the easy part. Im glad you are going the hydraulic throwout bearing route- if I do mine again, I think I would have to go that way instead of the slave set-up. The slave bracket is a little complex because of how far back the motor sits in the frame and body. Some have gotten it to work, but I had trouble with it.
If you use the chevy truck master, go for the duralast piece, it is a bit beefier than the others.
Good luck
 
Ok looking at the pictures in your post the mounting angle of the truck MC looks very similar to a Camaro MC. I know the third gen Camaro used a 3/4 MC and I know I have one laying out in the back shed. Hopefully this weekend I can try lining it up to the firewall to see how close of a match it is.
 
The McLeod one is expensive but damn it's nice!! installed one on a TKO600.
 
No clutch fork, bolts up to the tranny, external bleed line, super easy to bleed and set up and firm pedal feel, not sloppy.

This is it:

2483c86a6a6aad.jpg

2483c86a77f8d4.jpg
 
For those people that have converted to a hydraulic clutch what set up did you use, are you happy with it, and what would you do different? Also is the feel of it really that much better/different than the old rod and Zbar setup when it is working right? I am getting ready to put a GM T5 in my 74 Vette in place of the TH400. I am leaning towards a Chevy truck master and a Howe hydraulic TOB.

I used the Chevy truck master cylinder and slave cylinder / made up a bracket to attach my slave to the bell housing. Uses the standard through out bearing and clutch fork. Works great / been working for three years now.

:)
 
Same unit, just the bolting flange is different to fit the muncie input shaft cover/retainer plate
 
Ok looks like the Howe and Ram throwout bearings are around the same price. Now I just need to decide which one to go with. Both have seal kits available and Google isn't coming up with loads of complaints on either one. Does anyone have any thoughts between the two?

As for the master cylinder I was wrong and a Camaro one is a much different angle. So it looks like I am going to using a Wilwood master and mocking everything up in my 73 parts car so I can have the adapter made before I down my car. Plus the entire dash is out so I have plenty of room to work and take pictures!
 
Same unit, just the bolting flange is different to fit the muncie input shaft cover/retainer plate

So could I use the same clutch the car came with?

I have the one original from GM (the one the car came with) and a new one, no sense buying another clutch but I like that Mcleod throwout bearing.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/MCL-13005/?image=large
It looks that it comes with a master cylinder.

If you have your own master cylinder you only need the #1300 for your application.
$300 without master cylinder here

11944b0fd987475a8.jpg
 
Bringing this back from the grave.

I went with a Howe hydraulic throwout bearing and have not been very happy with it. The latest problem was a fluid leak. I am seriously thinking about ditching this for a slave cylinder.

I know a lot of people have had trouble with brackets for push style slave cylinders, but has anyone tried a pull style slave cylinder. They seam easier to mount and more out of the way, so is there any type of drawback to a pull type?
 
Bringing this back from the grave.

I went with a Howe hydraulic throwout bearing and have not been very happy with it. The latest problem was a fluid leak. I am seriously thinking about ditching this for a slave cylinder.

I know a lot of people have had trouble with brackets for push style slave cylinders, but has anyone tried a pull style slave cylinder. They seam easier to mount and more out of the way, so is there any type of drawback to a pull type?

just use a 84-92 f-body setup and bellhousing.
 
Bringing this back from the grave.

I went with a Howe hydraulic throwout bearing and have not been very happy with it. The latest problem was a fluid leak. I am seriously thinking about ditching this for a slave cylinder.

I know a lot of people have had trouble with brackets for push style slave cylinders, but has anyone tried a pull style slave cylinder. They seam easier to mount and more out of the way, so is there any type of drawback to a pull type?

Pull type meaning the kind that are in LT1 F-bodies? There are not many high performance options when it comes to a pull type diaphragm. Most high performance clutches use the stock Valeo diaphragm with a different disk. I think centerforce is the only one that uses their own diaphragm. My father has a LT stlye T56 (pull style clutch) in his 55 chevy using the factory Valeo diaphragm and a McLeod disk. Seems to hold up ok to 400 hp and lots of launches

Im not sure if your 5 speed would be much different than my muncie, but the back of my clutch fork was very close to the floor where it slopes up to the firewall. I couldnt see anyway something would fit behind there. At least, thats how I remember it when I was doing my hydro clutch last year.
 
Bringing this back from the grave.

I went with a Howe hydraulic throwout bearing and have not been very happy with it. The latest problem was a fluid leak. I am seriously thinking about ditching this for a slave cylinder.

I know a lot of people have had trouble with brackets for push style slave cylinders, but has anyone tried a pull style slave cylinder. They seam easier to mount and more out of the way, so is there any type of drawback to a pull type?

just use a 84-92 f-body setup and bellhousing.

There is some clearance issues with that setup. Just checking my options.
 
Top