Hydrolic throw out bearing conversion concerns...

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:39 pm

fieroguru wrote:I though the FWD GM Getrag was in Hiatus from 1995 to 2000 and that they only ran and updated version of the Isuzu during those years.

GM went back to Getrag transmissions later, but the 282 is absolutely DEAD after the '94 model year. The newer boxes are different models.

Atilla the Fun · Post by **Atilla the Fun** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:55 am

that could mean milling the hell out of the flywheel, if I understand correctly. Worse case scenario, anyone competent with a lathe could remove maybe as much as 0.050" off the rear of the crankshaft, and do likewise to the flywheel, but probably that on a brake rotor machine. If you lose too much, it is possible to shim the flywheel out away from the crank.

The Dark Side of Will · Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:13 am

That's not the problem... It works fine on production cars and I can't see that the aftermarket parts would be THAT far off production part dimensions.

I'm starting to think it's a parts selection problem.

Atilla the Fun · Post by **Atilla the Fun** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:17 am

we are discussing a flywheel GM never offered, right? If I understand, the measurement from the bellhousing face of the block to the clutch surface of the flywheel is not the same distance as it is with any stock m/t Fiero, all of which, seems to me, should be the same.

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:39 am

Hmm, I never measured my HTOB, I just didn't get that technical into it. I pretty much bolted it together hoping it would work because I didn't really have much of a choice at that point. It had to work, lol. In anycase, I've put plenty of miles on my 00+ setup with zero issues whatsoever.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:59 pm

Jinxmutt wrote:Hmm, I never measured my HTOB, I just didn't get that technical into it. I pretty much bolted it together hoping it would work because I didn't really have much of a choice at that point. It had to work, lol. In anycase, I've put plenty of miles on my 00+ setup with zero issues whatsoever.

Well there are choices out there...

I have found that there are just about no 2 similar HTOB's out there, Christian got one local to him, and it was 7mm shorter fully compressed than mine.

He is sending it out and its going in, and BTW, I think it was listed for use in an 95+ isuzu....

WHAT A JOKE!! gahhh I hate these glass box transmissions!!!

fieroguru · Post by **fieroguru** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:17 pm

Jinxmutt wrote:Hmm, I never measured my HTOB, I just didn't get that technical into it. I pretty much bolted it together hoping it would work because I didn't really have much of a choice at that point. It had to work, lol. In anycase, I've put plenty of miles on my 00+ setup with zero issues whatsoever.

Mine has been issue free since I fixed the spacing issue caused by the SBC swap - my flywheel face is further from the HTOB than stock 3.1. This allowed the HTOB to over extend upon original install. Once that spacing issue was resolved, it has continued to work well for the last 3 years. I will never go back to the fiero slave setup.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:38 pm

Got a HTOB that was short enough to work, yet it had the inccorect line configuration, the HTOB was most likely from an isuzu and not a getrag.

Going to purchase HTOB number 3 today. Just going to order an autozone one and hope for the best.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:30 pm

Turns out the clutch line is 6mm, and the HTOB is 1/4 (6.8MM), so I am now screwed untill I come up with some crazy compression fitting setup.

fieroguru · Post by **fieroguru** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:51 pm

Just cut the bubble flare off the fiero line as close to the end as possible. Then install the 1/4" nut and reflare the fiero hard line and used a 1/4" flare to flare coupler to connect the two.

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:05 pm

You could also make a 90* adapter...

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:22 pm

fieroguru wrote:Just cut the bubble flare off the fiero line as close to the end as possible. Then install the 1/4" nut and reflare the fiero hard line and used a 1/4" flare to flare coupler to connect the two.

I tried flaring it SO MANY TIMES, to only have it barely hold in the flare tool, and eventually it just frayed and cracked when it was being flared. If the line was BRAND NEW, i might have gotten it to work. I had a mini dremel out trying to clean up the little burrs and crap that it made, got it REALLY decent once, but it still leaked like crazy.

Anyway, I have a 1/4 compression fitting on right now, seems to be holding when I can get it a little more than half bled, but I cant bleed the clutch as I have no help, and I cant seem to gravity bleed without letting it run dry... It ran dry last night, and wouldnt take anymore gravity bleeding, so I am just lost now. I imagine that if I try to suck bleed or pump bleed, then gravity, then call it good, I might be somewhere.... but considering I have never been good at bleeding, or have I ever bled a clutch myself (or ever really needed to, in the 6-7 transmissions and 2 slave cylinders I have changed I have yet to actually need to bleed anything.

fieroguru · Post by **fieroguru** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:57 pm

darkhorizon wrote:
... but I cant bleed the clutch as I have no help, and I cant seem to gravity bleed without letting it run dry...

You just need to make some of these handy tools... just remember to keep the pressure low and use the rubber diaphram to keep from blasting air into the fluid.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:32 am

That just might work...

Going outside right now to lower the car down and let it gravity bleed while I read a book or something, so I can let it sit over night and let any air bubbles come up.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:56 pm

Gravity bleeding, and rocking the pedal around vigorously let me taste full disengagement today!

Waiting on my tuner to come back and I will give it a test drive in a day or 2.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:27 pm

clutch is in good shape still, took it for a short drive today.

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 11:33 am

Got a bunch of miles on the HTOB setup, working great!

Enaugement is a bit different than a typical slave setup. Seems to come in and out a bit higher than most fieros. I have not yet had the dreaded "clutch fluid pile" under the transmission obviously... but when I depress the clutch it feels like its resistive all the way down just until it gets to the bottom.

Atilla the Fun · Post by **Atilla the Fun** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:26 pm

So if you do another Fiero, will you do it the same again, or try something else?

darkhorizon · Post by **darkhorizon** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:29 pm

I hate manual transmission things... luckly this car will not be around my garage for much longer...

I would for sure do a HTOB again in this setup, as the stock slave setup WILL NOT work with the headers we used on this. I dont think I would really go out of my way to do a HTOB on a near stock 3800 swap. The stock slave works enough for me... but again I hate manuals so in the end I dont care.

BigRedDeckSpoiler · Post by **BigRedDeckSpoiler** » Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:04 am

Holy resurrection, Batman!

This may be old news, by now, but without rehashing the entire thread, I'll just state that I have been using a NVG-T550 (aka Cavalier Getrag) for several years now.
Here's the scoop... The Fiero clutch has a higher assembled height from the flywheel friction surface of the flywheel, to the pressure plate fingers, than does the Cavalier Getrag. By over 1/4 inch.

To the folks at Ram...
Two different applications, and a couple of questions:

88590 - '93 Chevy Cavalier V6, with hydraulic release bearing.
88644HD - '88 Pontiac Fiero V6, with mechanical release bearing (separate slave cylinder with release fork.)

Is there a difference in the height of the pressure plate fingers, between the two, as measured from the flywheel surface?
If there indeed is a difference (I suspect the 88590 will be "shorter", by at least 1/4") is there an HD kit available for the Cavalier? Nobody seems to list one.

Their response...
88644hd from levers to friction surface is 1.6" and for the 88590 it is 1.285"

So if you're using that trans with a Fiero based clutch, that's why you don't have enough room to accommodate disc wear.

They didn't say whether they made an HD version, but I suspect not. Most of you want something beefier than the Ram HD, anyway.

Real Fiero Tech

Hydrolic throw out bearing conversion concerns...

Re: Hydrolic throw out bearing conversion concerns...