Jump to content
SAU Community

Push vs Pull Clutch

elohim_imanu
 Share

Recommended Posts

elohim_imanu Contributor

elohim_imanu

Posted
Posted

Unbelievably, I can not seem to find much about this subject on SAU. Maybe my search button is broke. I have have done a fair bit of Googling, but get mixed messages. You would think that since most GTRs have them and Nissan moved to them with the R34GTT, that it would be superior, but I see a lot of people converting, I can only presume because the market seems to be more varied. 

I am getting my hands on a new R34 big box which comes with a pull clutch setup. I am interested in peoples opinions of the pull system and if I should convert it to a push ($300).

The application is street driven R33 ~350HP, which I don't intend to drift or do burn outs.

Seems that the options for pull clutches are limited and they generally are more expensive. Is that just because they are more beefy? Considering an Organic Nismo Sport pull Clutch which will cost me about $800.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/482209-push-vs-pull-clutch/
Share on other sites
r32-25t Grand Master

r32-25t

Posted
Posted

One isn’t really better then the other, the reason for converting is because most performance clutches are only made in push type and it easier for companies to make a conversion kit rather then making a different clutch 

  • Like 1
SteveL Mentor

SteveL

Posted
Posted

Push type clutch has been around since forever.   Simple and relatively cheap to produce.    Pull type not so much in terms of design and application, but the pull type has advantages in terms of operating mechanism leverage so can give comparatively lighter pedal loads at increased plate pressure.

The weak points of the Nissan push type clutch mechanism (used in early GTR's, etc) are the clutch throw-out fork and pivot ball.       The design hasn't changed much since at least the 240z and is OK for stock or mildly up-rated applications, but increasing pressure plate ratings to competition levels can and has lead to failure of the clutch fork (fatigue cracking) and/or the pivot ball.     The BRE 240Z's were probably some of the first to identify the problem in competition in the US.

Most people will probably never have a problem.   It really only appears at high pressure plate levels.     I suffered a broken clutch fork in the Z at PI, and later a stripped friction plate on a supposed 'performance' clutch at the same venue....but that's another story.

NISMO make an uprated pivot ball for many Nissan's that use the push type clutch.   Not sure about the fork, but I'm sure that there's something 'billet' out there (and the crowd goes wild over the word 'billet'.....).

elohim_imanu Contributor

elohim_imanu

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, SteveL said:

Push type clutch has been around since forever.   Simple and relatively cheap to produce.    Pull type not so much in terms of design and application, but the pull type has advantages in terms of operating mechanism leverage so can give comparatively lighter pedal loads at increased plate pressure.

The weak points of the Nissan push type clutch mechanism (used in early GTR's, etc) are the clutch throw-out fork and pivot ball.       The design hasn't changed much since at least the 240z and is OK for stock or mildly up-rated applications, but increasing pressure plate ratings to competition levels can and has lead to failure of the clutch fork (fatigue cracking) and/or the pivot ball.     The BRE 240Z's were probably some of the first to identify the problem in competition in the US.

Most people will probably never have a problem.   It really only appears at high pressure plate levels.     I suffered a broken clutch fork in the Z at PI, and later a stripped friction plate on a supposed 'performance' clutch at the same venue....but that's another story.

NISMO make an uprated pivot ball for many Nissan's that use the push type clutch.   Not sure about the fork, but I'm sure that there's something 'billet' out there (and the crowd goes wild over the word 'billet'.....).

Great answer, never had that problem on my 260Z though. Must have been lucky. I had wondered why Nismo made that pivot ball. I think I am going to just get the Nismo pull clutch and keep the box standard. 

Anybody know if there is a difference between the R34 and R33 master cylinder. Do I need a R34 type as the slave will be a pull type. Will a R34 fit my R33 or will the stock R33 work anyway? I guess the R33 GTR is pull, but doesn't have some sort of booster?

SteveL Mentor

SteveL

Posted
Posted

According to the parts lists I just looked at they all use the same clutch master (R32, R33, R34 GTR's) regardless of push or pull clutch, and the R33 does have booster.    That makes sense because the clutch master doesn't know or care about push or pull and any differences in travel, etc can be accounted for at the throw-out mechanism.    PN is C0610-05U00, superceded by 31610-05U01

  • Like 1
elohim_imanu Contributor

elohim_imanu

Posted
  • Author
Posted
34 minutes ago, SteveL said:

According to the parts lists I just looked at they all use the same clutch master (R32, R33, R34 GTR's) regardless of push or pull clutch, and the R33 does have booster.    That makes sense because the clutch master doesn't know or care about push or pull and any differences in travel, etc can be accounted for at the throw-out mechanism.    PN is C0610-05U00, superceded by 31610-05U01

Thanks. I was not sure if there was some sort of fluid transfer difference.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Airbox for +T

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • GTSBoy
      Airbox for +T

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • BuiltNotBought
      Airbox for +T

      By BuiltNotBought · Posted

      There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • BuiltNotBought
      Airbox for +T

      By BuiltNotBought · Posted

      I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
    • BuiltNotBought
      Airbox for +T

      By BuiltNotBought · Posted

      Yes that’s another issue, I always have a front mount, plus will be turbo plus intake will big hasstle. I’ve been told if it looks stock they’re fine with it by a couple others who have done it ahahaha.    I know @Kinkstaah said the stock gtt airbox is limiting but I might just have to do that to avoid a defect so it atleast looks legit. Or an enclosed pod so it’s hidden away and feed air from the snorkel and below Intercooler holes like kinstaah mentioned. Hmm what to do 
×
×
  • Create New...