Help please: FE flywheel clutch bellhousing assembly not happening
 

Hi guys,

I’m curently fitting the flywheel (M 6375 N427), clutch (McLeod Super Street Pro 12”) and bellhousing (QT RM 6057) to a newly pro built alloy 427 FE.

Despite no experience of assembling American V8’s, I thought I had it all covered, but now somethings not quite right. Anyhow this is the story so far.

The virtually fully built motor is still on the crate stand.

I started by tapping in the sintered pilot bush into the crank. Well known engine builder assured me needle roller not reqd. A bit firm tapping it home, but no shavings or big dramas there. Next the block/dust plate and then the flywheel, torquing down to 75 ft lbs. All went on pretty good, if again good press fit. 184t Flywheel has odd spaced holes, so only goes on one way. There’s about a 0.55” gap between the flywheel and the block plate. Don’t know if that is normal, but checked the mini starter and pinion was at rest, about 3/16 back from the ring gear, However, when unwinding the bendix it enagaged fully. Indexed the starter, loctited the screws and removed it, to retro fit later.
Fitted the bell, dialled it and found surprising .022” TIR error. Made some offset dowels, got it within .002”, retained the dowels with loctite and retested all good.
Removed the bell, fitted the clutch friction plate (sintered pads to flywheel) with supplied spigot spline locator thing.
First question. When bolting the pressure plate it was off (ie a gap) of 3/16 -1/4” from the flywheel. Bolted it down quite easily until it was flush with flywheel, finally criss crossing until 35 ft lbs. I presume it’s not supposed to be flush on free assembly to allow some preload. Am I correct?
So far so good. Assembled the std Ford fork (spring clip) and McLeod TOB (external slave) and here’s the problem. The assembled block plate to clutch finger height is around 3.62-3.75”, but the distance from the spinning face of the TOB (with the fork touching the bell window) to bellhousing flange is about 1/4 less than that. So I can’t assemble the bell to the block as the TOB hits the fingers and precludes free assembly.
I’d be more than happy to be embarrassed if somebody will tell me what I’ve done wrong. The fork supplier (also well known FE specialist) says the RM 6057 is designed for the standard fork.

Can you post any pictures?

Pictures, showing not enough depth in the bellhousing

If there are other forks available with different TOB mount heights I would investigate one or more of them. The other possibility is the fork is correct and the throwout bearing has different heights available. If that is the case drop back one size to a 'shorter' height bearing.

I suspect I am preaching to the choir on this one but, your final assembly needs to have adequate room to accomodate normal disc wear. As the disc wears the pressure plate face will get closer to the flywheel and the release fingers will rise getting closer to the TOB. Your assembly needs to be able to accommodate this normal sort of wear without the release fingers contacting the TOB.

My suspicion (I don't know for a fact) is that you will find potentially two or more usable forks and TOB's which (in the right combination) should provide proper clearance after a bit of fiddling with different pieces. Although I don't use an FE, I went through a similar Easter Egg hunt with my Lakewood housing and a custom dual disc clutch install. A bit aggravating but solvable.


Ed

I would call Brent at Lykins Motorsports. He will know what you need to do. His number is on his website.

There is a spacer that goes between the bellhousing and clutch fork pivot bracket. It should not be used.

Thanks Brent, but.....

Remove the spacer and the clearances are good, but the fork is up against the back of the bellhousing. In that case, the nose of the TKO is going to hit the fork.

Show me a close up of how you have the bearing attached to the fork.

For reference Flywheel is 184 th FRD M-6375-N427. The gap between the 1/8"
dust/block plate and the back of the FW is about 0.55".

Just to remind everyone this is the RM 6057 the shorter bell housing that’s 6.5” not 7” deep.

I believe I am running the same setup without the plate as the Bellhousing has the space built in. Is there any way the clutch fork got bent or could be bent to provide clearance? It seems there was a little spacer under the hinge portion that could be removed, but I may be wrong on that. I will have to look on Friday at my set up.

Phil

This is a very common application and you have all the typical parts.

I'd slide that transmission in and see what it looks like.

The bearing retainer won't hit the fork if the pushrod end of the fork is pushed to the front of the engine. I think your slave cylinder pushrod is in an "actuated" position.

Is the TO bearing against the clutch fingers and the bellhousing register - both? In other words trapped between them. I have the same clutch, TO bearing, bellhousing in mine and it's not tight like that. My flywheel may be different but they are usually pretty close in thickness.

I’m wondering if this is the issue. Is everybody’ else’s flywheel so far from the block plate? The gap is 0.55”

That does look strange - but never measured mine.

This is the only picture I have of mine but I would say it is closer to the block plate.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p...P1010001-1.jpg

For some reason my eyes read 0.055" the first time I looked at your dimension rather than the 0.55" that it actually is.. I can't say I recall ever seeing a flywheel standing off the back of the engine that much. My suspicion is you have the wrong flywheel for your application.

Ed

That’s not right.

I don’t use the FRPP flywheels but with the McLeod and RAM flywheels, they sit so close to the block that the ARP flywheel bolts come dangerously close to rubbing the rear main cap because they protrude a tiny amount.

That is too much gap. You have found the problem.

I didn’t measure mine, but it was less than a quarter inch.

Your flywheel (M 6375 N427) looks just like my Centerforce aluminum flywheel, at least in your pictures and my memory. But if you go to either Summit or Jegs, both make a big deal about the M 6375 N427 not fitting pre-1965 Ford FE engines, but my Centerforce fits all FE engines, even back to 1963. I don't know why this would be, and what the difference even could be, but that's the only difference I can come up with. Maybe Brent knows what the pre-1965 thing is all about.

Thanks for all the responses guys. I think I’ve solved the issue. Basically the TOB wouldn’t go back far enough, because with the 1/2” bracket packing block removed, it rubbed on he back of the bellhousing as it rocked. So today I ground 3/16” of the sides of the O.E. fork and raised the pivot bracket 1/8”. This allowed to to swing back another 3/8””. So the TKO is now mounted and there’s 1/4” free play between the TOB and the clutch fingers.
I still think the flange SCAT put on this OE spec crank is too thick. It would be better if the flywheels was 1/4” further back, but obviously removing the crankfor remachining is unthinkable on a new dynoed engine.
The remaining problem is that starter engages with the ring teeth only 70% but compared to whatIi faced this morning, that’s a small nut to crack.
Thanks again guys.