Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Interesting development!

Carlo, I have decided to go for an ATS carbon twin-plate, so unfortunately your Exedy clutch will not get a run this time, but I think it would be great for all of us if we could address the issues raised by Risking and Dazmo... In addition to the above two comments, I also heard of instances of the clutch shearing the flywheel bolts (below pic)...

exedy_carbon_bolt.jpg

As you can imagine, cars on this website (and in this section specifically) make pretty high power and torque numbers, so it would be great if I could put Exedy back on our lists for the next clutch that we all will inevitably have to buy...

I was definitely drawn (and also at the same time.... apprehensive) about the flywheel design. It looks extremely light... Possibly TOO light? Are you able to give us some weight specs of the clutch (total), clutch discs and flywheel?

Cheers,

Andrew.

  • Replies 615
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Nothing doing :D

Car is sitting very stationary in a corner of John's workshop until my clutch comes... I've been told "about a week".

Sorry Daz, but I couldn't pull out of the purchase. Once they have your money, there ain't no getting it back :(

we put a exidy twin in the targa car for the v8 supercar support race, i think it was a carbon one by the price (dad just got it fitted and didn't tell me much about it). But dad kept over heating it on the start line, seems it dosn't like being revd for very long on the line. Which left him with clutch slip for 1/2 a lap (he backed off till it gripped again) Never had that problem with the sports ceramic that we run in targa.

After chopping and changing about eleventy billion times, I'm currently waiting on a Nismo Coppermix Twin Plate (Competition Spec)

Nothing wrong with that Andrew, I have a super coppermix twin plate and must say its the best clutch I've had in regards too how light it is on the leg and has quite a bit of give on taking off. It's not a ON/Off sort of clutch that jerks or stalls if not given heaps of revs..

Other clutches I have used are Nismo G-MAX twin plate, Exedy twin plate and OS twin plate.

Oh, and my car did see the track quite a bit, handling 350rwkws no problem....

Exactly. Hence why its standard issue in the ZTUNE...

Hi Jack, and good choice Andrew. You realise your car is late model R32 and has pull type clutch, so you will need to convert everything over to push type? I guess who you bought this from advise on this? That silver R32 GTR here the silver one has one of these clutches, and nice to drive yet strong.

FYI car is on hoist looking at us, waiting, with The SLot Car sleeping underneath atm.

if he ordered the right nismo coppermix clutch (ie a late 32/33 pull one) then he wont need the converter stuff. they make a compatible clutch so you don't have to convert. :down:

ouch!

ahh well even if its the wrong one its easy enough to convert the box to push, and gives a better selection of aftermarket clutches too.

those os/giken style pull to push kits on the other hand sound like a silly idea

Hey all...

Yep, I know that I have a PULL gearbox.... I made sure that I ordered a PULL version, so it should bolt straight on :P

Clutch should be here soon, so hopefully the white whipper snipper will be moving under its own power again soon!

Hey Risking

Would be very interested to hear about what broke , in the Twin Plate Exedy Carbon-R Kit , As i mentioned to merli any info on this style of kit would be fantastic , Reason for asking i'm the Qld Sale's Rep for Exedy Australia , All an any feed back on the kit would be fantastic !

Cheers

Carlo

Qld Sale's

Exedy Australia Pty Ltd

Eagle Farm Qld .

Not to go off on a tangent too much from this build thread, but seeing you posted I shall post the crap your company sold to me, then didn’t want to know about it nor want to inspect it for a design fault.

This clutch, was installed by a clutch specialist, this clutch lasted not even 72hrs. I wanted a clutch to use in my car as my OS twin plate was getting rebuilt. The phone monkey at the time was adamant this would be up to the task…

CIMG07812eJPGmsgBF2B8030-CEF6-446A-.jpg

CIMG07872eJPGmsgBF2B8030-CEF6-446A-.jpg

CIMG07832eJPGmsgBF2B8030-CEF6-446A-.jpg

To be honest as this was a couple of years ago, I’m not even phased if you reply.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...