Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I had this clutch (STR2CD ) in my GTST for about 8 years.

I did about 8,000km on it, 30% city traffic, the rest 4th/5th gear on the motorway.

Clutch was never abused .. no burnouts, daily commute etc.

Long story short:

Clutch started to slip in 4th+ gear at 3800rpm coming onto boost (18PSI)

Checked the slave cylinder, and (the plunger) sits tight with no play.

I had trouble getting the slave cylinder bolted on again, it's about 2mm 'off'

So I presume this is down to wear. I don't know how much play the plunger/fork had at installation though.

Clutch was installed brand new, with the supplied bearing carrier/sleeve. (16mm)

 

I don't want to pull the box atm and was thinking shortening the plunger by 2mm .. clutch should still disengage I reckon.

Thoughts on this? Would that be an option?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481653-osgiken-str2cd-wear/
Share on other sites

Check the adjustment of the clutch pedal under the dash first to make sure the master cylinder isn't being preloaded. It may have been adjusted in the past for a worn clutch and now readjusted when new one was installed. 

  • Like 1

Have you checked the clutch pedal box isn't broken ?

They are notorious for the spot welds cracking and the box then flexing all over the shop.

You'll have to flip upside down in the foot well with a bright torch and get some one to press the clutch to see it.

  • Like 1

As @robbo_rb180 mentioned above check your pedal box integrity and adjustment against master. You should never actually need to adjust your pedal height if done correctly in the first place though. This is normally set when a new clutch goes in and actually should be pretty low before any fork movement happens.

The theory behind this is as your clutch wears your pedal becomes higher with also less free travel, indicating plate wear. The problem is most people adjust their clutch pedal to be too high when a new clutch goes in, thinking it's too low to the floor when it really isn't. If you do this so you start with a higher pedal you run out of adjustment when it starts to wear, which ends up preloading the pressure plate fingers, causing a slipping clutch as it is ever so slightly disengaged. 

So have you got a high clutch pedal with no free travel ? Did you ever have pedal free travel ? If so you could try to adjust it do the pedal becomes higher until you get some sort of free travel, unless you got the wrong carrier in there, which I suspect you do as you mentioned a 16mm carrier.

Is this a 32 or 33 gtst ? And is it definitely a dampened STR2CD clutch ? Because I just checked and the OS giken STR2CD correct release bearing carrier from OS giken specs is 18mm for R32 and 14mm for the R33.

I think your box is coming out mate.

 

7 hours ago, BK said:

As @robbo_rb180 mentioned above check your pedal box integrity and adjustment against master. You should never actually need to adjust your pedal height if done correctly in the first place though. This is normally set when a new clutch goes in and actually should be pretty low before any fork movement happens.

The theory behind this is as your clutch wears your pedal becomes higher with also less free travel, indicating plate wear. The problem is most people adjust their clutch pedal to be too high when a new clutch goes in, thinking it's too low to the floor when it really isn't. If you do this so you start with a higher pedal you run out of adjustment when it starts to wear, which ends up preloading the pressure plate fingers, causing a slipping clutch as it is ever so slightly disengaged. 

So have you got a high clutch pedal with no free travel ? Did you ever have pedal free travel ? If so you could try to adjust it do the pedal becomes higher until you get some sort of free travel, unless you got the wrong carrier in there, which I suspect you do as you mentioned a 16mm carrier.

Is this a 32 or 33 gtst ? And is it definitely a dampened STR2CD clutch ? Because I just checked and the OS giken STR2CD correct release bearing carrier from OS giken specs is 18mm for R32 and 14mm for the R33.

I think your box is coming out mate.

 

You're correct, I got this wrong from my other clutch document (TR2CD), it's 18mm, not 16mm.

It's an R33 GTST, I couldn't re-edit my post to put this in.

Good points, I'll check the pedal height and check if there is any pre-load on the master.

Attached a picture of the slave, not sure if it can retract any further?

Cheers!

 

slave.jpg

Yeah slave looks pretty maxed out. The release bearing itself is just an OEM one. So are the bearing release carriers, which come in 2mm increments from 8mm - 32mm.

So what is actually in your car, an 18mm ?

Read my info again. R33 gtst with this clutch is supposed to be a 14mm carrier, which is actually the standard R32 GTR push bearing carrier.

Where are you getting your info from ? Because a TR2CD for a 33 gtst is supposed to be 12mm, NOT 16mm. 16mm for TR2CD again is for a 32 gtst. Seems like you've maybe have been buying 32 gtst clutches mate, as your information is incorrect for your car and you've twice now quoted R32 gtst carrier sizes for the clutches mentioned.

I know I am correct, as what I have noticed in OS giken specs is the R33 GTSt seems to follow all of the same carrier sizes as the R32 GTR push boxes, I guess because the 33 big box is so similar. They are actually the same as a GTR around the bell housing area, input shaft, counter shaft and main shaft gears.

If you do indeed have an 18mm and it's supposed to have a 14mm, you've pretty much prematurely worn out your clutch and would exactly cause this problems you've described, as your release bearing is 4mm further forward towards the pressure plate fingers than they should be. Basically like driving around with your foot resting on the clutch all the time - not good.

 

  • Like 1

Thanks for the input, I got the info from OSGiken. I did not measure the actual sleeve when it had been installed (which I should have).

All I can say is that the clutch came with the spec'd carrier / bearing. I don't see my clutch in the attached page though, do you have another document?

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OS.JPG

😂 That is from their english OS giken page, which is definitely incorrect compared to a copy I have, which I've referenced when doing GTRs. Something has been lost in translation...

The one from actually OS giken Japan says:

 

OS Giken Clutch Notes.PNG

  • Like 1
10 minutes ago, BK said:

😂 That is from their english OS giken page, which is definitely incorrect compared to a copy I have, which I've referenced when doing GTRs. Something has been lost in translation...

The one from actually OS giken Japan says:

 

OS Giken Clutch Notes.PNG

Cheers for that!  Yes, my document / info is from the US support!

When the clutch was installed many years ago I didn't do the due diligence. I ordered the whole kit from Japan, so I assumed it will be ok. I also didn't check how much free play there was at the fork etc. since it wasn't installed by me but my mechanic. If it was already 'tight' back then it would explain my current issue.

 

While at it, back then I also bought this Nismo slave ... it wouldn't retract further, would it? I think it's just a bigger cylinder for heavier clutches (?)

I never installed it since the twin clutch was easy to operate.

 

 

 

nismo.jpg

Might as well sell that.

Under no circumstances use a Nismo big bore push slave. They make the clutch lighter, but they DO NOT provide enough travel for multiplate clutches, and are actually recommended from Nismo themselves only to be used with single plates in the notes. They are right, they provide less travel.

I've tried one with an R3C on GTR with a 26mm carrier. After a bit of use the clutch wouldn't disengage properly because of the reduced travel, very noticeable. Bit different with the STR as they are a pretty soft clutch for a twin plate. They are really only designed to be silent and have a light clutch pedal. Not really the sort of clutch for any serious power that's for sure with such a light pressure plate.

But because of the less travel it might actually retract further, and provide some freeplay.

Might.

But if you've got the wrong carrier that really doesn't change the fundamental error of the clutch release fork to bearing carrier height, it's going to throw your travel amount off.

I checked the pedal travel, and it needs about .8 - 10mm until it rests on the master rod/actuator.

Then another 5 to 7mm till there is resistance and the clutch starts to operate.

I'm not under the impression that there is any 'load' on the clutch master while the pedal is resting / clutch disengaged.

I didn't unbolt anything, so that's just my observation from operating the pedal by hand and having a close look / feel.

 

 

 

I think it's time to pull the box out, remove your clutch and inspect the setup. The clutch has obviously worn raising the front cover fingers, making them push against the release fork, therefore pushing your slave piston in. It could be slightly disengaging the clutch without you realising it by feel.

The question will be is it because of an incorrect bearing carrier length being too long, causing premature wear in the plates. Or everything is infact correct, and it's just worn out from light use because the STR2CD is a shit clutch (which they are from a performance point of view).

There's a reason there is no OS giken GTR recommendation to fit a STR2CD behind an RB26 GTR, because they handle very low torque and is barely an upgrade over a stocker as far as torque loading goes.

10 hours ago, BK said:

I think it's time to pull the box out, remove your clutch and inspect the setup. The clutch has obviously worn raising the front cover fingers, making them push against the release fork, therefore pushing your slave piston in. It could be slightly disengaging the clutch without you realising it by feel.

The question will be is it because of an incorrect bearing carrier length being too long, causing premature wear in the plates. Or everything is infact correct, and it's just worn out from light use because the STR2CD is a shit clutch (which they are from a performance point of view).

There's a reason there is no OS giken GTR recommendation to fit a STR2CD behind an RB26 GTR, because they handle very low torque and is barely an upgrade over a stocker as far as torque loading goes.

 

Cheers, yes ...  it's time to possibly rethink my choice of clutch while at it .. I think it's just worn.

Which clutch would you recommend? 300KW ish setup? Must be 'OK' to be used in traffic.

As for STR2CD, OSG wouldn't give me any torque figures, just HP (450-500).

I found that a bit funny ..

For example you could make 450HP @

8,000 rpm and 295 lbs ft

Or

4,000 rpm and 591 lbs ft

 

 

 

Edited by Torques

I have used exedy in past but have moved to npc for the last few clutches as they are a lot nicer for daily driving. Some others I know have tried mantic on a few different platforms with good results with holding big power and still nice for daily driving.

  • Like 1
11 hours ago, Torques said:

I found that a bit funny ..

While that's true in general - on a particular engine, retaining the same mode of induction (ie turbo(s)), then the relationship between torque revs and power remains fairly constant. More power = more torque at about the same rpm.

On 12/17/2020 at 9:31 PM, GTSBoy said:

While that's true in general - on a particular engine, retaining the same mode of induction (ie turbo(s)), then the relationship between torque revs and power remains fairly constant. More power = more torque at about the same rpm.

That depends, often the torque curve shifts upwards when modifying an engine (especially with bigger turbos). Thus making more power @ higher rpm.

All things being equal it would be nice to have a torque figure for a clutch. :)

 

 

So update on my initial problem.

I found a push-pin that is about 1.5 mm shorter. (Ideally 2.5mm would do the trick)

I'll see if that fixes the issue for the time being. There's still no play at the fork but no pressure either.

I could mount the slave without any problems, but it sits tight.

 

In a couple of days I'll test if the clutch is still slipping...

I'll pull the box at a later point ...

pin.thumb.jpg.3655421beb73ccb15f1ab67cfd5fb13d.jpg

 

Edited by Torques
4 minutes ago, Torques said:

That depends, often the torque curve shifts upwards when modifying an engine (especially with bigger turbos). Thus making more power @ higher rpm.

No, I think you miss the point of what I said. It's the same engine. The clutch manufacturer knows what engine they're making the clutch for. They therefore know the likley characteristic rev/torque/power characteristic of the engine. A stock engine will to X torque at Y rpm and make Z power out of it. Make mods to it so that X increases and Y changes and you get a different Z.....and the clutch manufacturer can still choose to rate that clutch at the new Z number because it is likely tied very closely to the new value of X.

They're not talking about "here's a clutch from a 20L diesel engine that can handle 300HP and 3000ft-lb, it is therefore rated to 300HP on a Honda K20. Because that woudl be silly. The opposite would also be silly with the K20 clucth on the diesel. But if they say, here's a stock clutch for an RB25 and it can handle ~350 HP, and here's a better clutch for an RB25 and it can handle 700HP, then there's a really fair bet that the better one can handle about double the torque.

  • 3 years later...

This is an older post of mine but I just thought I should update it and explain what the problem was.

Long story short the friction plates were below their service limit.

New they are around 4mm, and service limit is (according to OSG) 3.5mm

In addition the crank seal gasket wasn't sealing 100% anymore and that led to an oily clutch.

Not sure what came first and why the clutch was worn after just 10,000km .. but all good now.

OSG refresh kit via Nengun

 

 

 

 

 

 

IMG_20240715_185726-01.jpeg

IMG_20240531_105647-01.jpeg

IMG_20240531_105919-01.jpeg

IMG_20240531_110052-01.jpeg

Edited by Torques
  • Like 1

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

    • This is awesome.     
    • Thanks for the quick replies guys its appreciated. A small extension was welded onto the standard 6boost external gate pipe which you can see where the pipe goes from black to stainless just below and to the right of the rear housing in the first picture. Overall I would say the flow is pretty good other than 6boosts choice to come straight off the collector at a decent angle.. Not sure why I went with two valves, I originally replaced the stock twin bovs with the GFB when I had the twins on. When I purchased the EFR it came with the Turbosmart Kompact BOV so I figured that would be a better option than the stock EFR Bov. I don't believe the Turbosmart BOV is adjustable? When I get the spike and then sudden dip in boost pressure, the turbo speed does drop as well. Stock head size wise however I believe it has Neo Turbo springs and a Neo Turbo intake camshaft and an aftermarket exhaust camshaft in the vicinity of 260 degrees. We didn't try a different MAC valve, we tried two different ways of plumbing it and we also tried removing the mac valve entirely and just having the boost source from the turbo directly connected to the wastegate and it still spiked / dropped and exhibited the same behaviour. Standard R33 GTR 5 speed tansmission. I'm running a Haltech Elite 2500 and can provide some logs if you. I understand what you're saying in that it looks like an auto plot however no, it's still a manual and it just has a lot of torque down low, for all intents and purposes it's a very impressive street car. I've attached a photo of the quickbitz dyno plot which was when the only difference is I was running -5 twin turbos with a mac valve. As you can see theres a decent dip in AFRs between 125kmh and 135kmh. Our problem now is not that the AFRs are dropping, just the boost pressure is dropping, however it is evident in the same RPM range of the map, coincidentally or not.
    • What transmission are you running?  It's a bit tricky with the scaling, but at face value the power "curve" looks more like a "line" which is a bit odd... basically a lot more like a dyno plot I'd expect with a highish (compared to a factory auto) stall torque converter type setup. If this is running an auto then this kind of boost control challenge is definitely a thing, the rpm scale on the dyno doesn't reflect what the engine is actually doing (unless the dyno has access to the engine's ACTUAL speed electronically) and what you'll get is a big rpm flare up as the engine torque launches past the converter pump's ability to resist torque at that rpm, then as the converter starts picking up rpm it will kinda even out again and the engine rpm will pick up more steadily. The trick with this "flare up" is if it's kinda near the boost threshold for the turbo then the engine's airflow requirements to maintain the previous boost level will outrun the turbo's ability to supply that boost - so you end up with a natural flattening off, if not dip when that happens.   If you are running closed loop, or even tune the "feed forward" wastegate duty cycle to deal with that rpm spike then when the engine starts settling to a more typical climb you'll actually have a situation where the gate is "too closed" and boost will run away for a bit, then have to pull down again.      It's not trivial to get this perfect as most boost control systems are generally expecting more predictable engine rpm rates of change, but if you *know* that's whats going on then you can at least "accept your fate" and realise getting that area perfect is kinda chasing your tail a bit, and assume that if the rest is working sensibly and the spike/dip isn't completely uncontrolled then you should be good. Sorry if I've gone off on a tangent, but the dyno plot and boost control behaviour look a LOT like what I've seen tuning autos in the past. What ECU are you running? Could possibly be convinced into looking at logs if I get too bored this weekend haha.
    • A few things that seem a bit off here. - why is there 2 BOV’s?  - the turbo smart BOV on the compressor housing, is it turned up ALL the way? I have seen this become an issue on old man Pete’s car. It would push open and recirc, turbo speed would rise and the boost pressure would do weird things. - stock head? Does that include springs? - tried a different MAC valve? Is it plumbed correctly?
    • Photo of manifold showing gate location? I mean, it's 6Boost, so we probably shouldn't be worrying, but always wroth knowing what the layout is. Plumbed back to atmosphere? Or into the dump?
×
×
  • Create New...