Aby@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (161)

I was wondering where people are getting the oem value from?

I have seen 2200 or 2240 thrown around in the past on these boards, but has anyone seen a published figure from the factory?

I ask for several reasons:

1. my left knee is begging me for a softer pedal.

2. Since I have made 360/380 wtq / DJ values & never had an issue with my oem clutch combo, I am confused by claims of 80% or 140% more holding capacity for exedy single or works ck1, but max limit is still just 360 / 400 ft/lbs of torque?!?!?

I only upgraded because i was modding the car & would easily exceed this phantom limit of the oem clutch combo. I originally went the ACT route & was very happy.

Time has since passed & now when applying Dirks / ACT's math to calculate a torque limit, the oem PP numbers really dont add up & suggest a higher clamp load from the oem PP.

For example using the T=NxRxPxF formula…

N = 2, R = .328, P = 2200 lbs, F = .25 = T = 361 ft/lbs

a clamp load of 2400 lbs generates a 393.6 ft/lbs limit, which has been exceeded by a number of people.

I know i have seen other people make similar & larger #'s (400/420) coming off of a dj or even 360 made on a mustang = ~407 wtg / dj based who's corr factor you use.

Another reason why I am throwing this discussion out there, is that im toying with the idea of using the oem pressure plate with the act sprung 6 puck disc.

While using the math above & substituting the coefficient of 0.32 for the ceramic pucks

with a clamp load of

2200 lbs = ~461 ft/lbs
&
2400 lbs = ~503 ft/lbs

So i'm toying with the idea of the oem PP & act HDG6 disc.

I had a exedy hd twin, act mb-7/hdg6, mb-7/hdss & comp stg 2, going from most effort down to least, and the comp stg 2 is nice, but maybe my install was jacked up, as i am not experiencing all the rave reviews for this combo.

So i'm looking once again........

Has anyone gone from oem clutch to exedy twin sd?

I like the idea of the single disc, less noise, cheaper, should last longer than a exedy twin in traffic conditions (personal experience).

Since i live in a very hilly area, so the clutch better be able to handle some slipping at times, a ceramic disc is in favor.... the comp unit doesnt care for it in my case, as both the exedy twin hd & mb7-hdg6 units lasted longer / better & didnt smell up the cabin.

I dont launch my car.

Has anyone tried the oem PP with an act hdg6 or any other ceramic puck disc in thier evo 8/9?

NSDQ

iTrader: (1)

I don't have the technical data you seek, but I will say, I can really feel my Exedy twin in my knee after cruising around if there's much traffic so I feel your pain (literally).

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

i'm not sure of the exact number but i know its less than their stage 1. if you call exedy usa, they'll tell you. i think there's more to it than clamp load though. my carbonetic pressure plate has a much higher clamp load, but is definitely softer than stock.

Aby@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (161)

Thanks for your insight Mychailo,

yeah I hear, read, experienced different loads as well with regards to PP designs, but i also have read a lot of contradictory stuff as well.

For example, people on the boards claim that the exedy sd twin is rated at ~500 ft/lbs at the crank & doesnt hold more than a stocker, while a rep from exedy claims its wtq.

I am a bit scared of that, because i want to believe the exedy rep, but they most likely dont drive an evo 8/9 with their products on it.. i could be wrong.

I read that the works ck1 pp is ~140% more clamp load than the oem unit, but can only hold 360 wtq? i couldnt find a single review about the ck1, but the works ck2 website makes the same claims & of the few reviews i read about that, people said the pedal was heavier / required more effort the the act mb-7 pp. works claims: The innovative pressure plate design will NOT increase pedal stiffness, but has a clamping force that is 140% the capacity of the stock unit.

I do know that i was able to shift my stock clutch easily @ 7500 rpm, something that i cant do with my current comp stg 2 combo.

Aby@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (161)

bump'n this,

just because i am getting closer to going with the oem pp w/HDG4 or HDG6 act puck disc.

I have run the HDG6 disc in the past with the basic mb-7 equivalent PP & drivability was as horrible as people make it sound.

TIA, aby

LetsGetThisDone

iTrader: (1)

I don't think a lighter PP will really help that much. But I thought the OEM pp was 2200lbs?

Aby@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (161)

Yeah, popular belief / published data claims 2200

It has been a while, but i recall seeing 2400 data too.

when using the equation above, in conjunction with my car on 2 different dyno jets generating 36x wtq on oem clutch & pp, it kinda jives with a heavier rating.

i never experienced a slipping clutch @ 36x wtq on my oem disc & pp after 30k miles.

barneyb

When my OEM clutch started slipping and I pulled it, it wasn't down to the rivets. So, what was wrong? My car is stock so no increase in torque. I suggest what happens is wear on the disc causes the clamping force to lessen. So, whatever a clutch is good for when new, is not what it can handle when worn.

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

I saw a pdf file somewhere from exedy a few months back. the stock plate is 2240 (if I remember correctly). the stage one and two use stock plate clamp load..same 2240. that I remember well. clamp load is clamp load. but two equal clamp loads can have different pedal pressures. the lever ratio can be played with to get different clamp loads for same plate spring. you can get higher clamp load and less pedal effort at same time, the negative is the pedal travel shortens. so there is less resolution to control engagement.