cable or hyd. clutch? what do you prefer?

[67rcks]

Man. Additional $640 for t5 conversion? In my worst dream I would buy anything from this corporation, except rubber mount and maybe crossmember. In addition, you need also exhaust pipe holder which bolts between the mount and trans. The remaining items are carried in local auto parts stores at much better prices.

You don't need any fulcrum adapter if you have cable clutch and late model lever (i.e. the one with center of rotation on passenger side)

 

[bdepedro]

I've been told by a number of people that it's needed but thinking about it, if I use a cable clutch w/ a late model lever and bellhousing I can't imagine why. If I were to use an early housing w/ a late model clutch or a late model housing w/ an early lever I can see needing to adapt the 2. I'll have to check on that, thanks!

I also forgot to mention that they said I don't need a new yoke since I will most likely be cutting and using my original drive shaft.

Don't worry, I fully intend to shop around for the best prices on everything I need. NPD has most of it cheaper. They even sell Modern Drivelines stuff for less!

 

[bdepedro]

Confirmed, you only need a fulcrom adapter if you use the old mechanical linkage w/ a late model bellhousing. Also, you need a 28 spline T-5 yoke. Additionally, the yoke doesn't effect whether you need to cut your driveshaft or not. I was told that some cars have enough play so that when the change to a T-5 the additional tail length still leaves the 3/4"(?) of play in the yoke. If not, you need to cut enough off your driveshaft so that you do.

A friend of mine put a T-5 in his '65 fastback and was able to swap in a stock alum driveshaft from a 2wd Explorer. The early cars have a shorter stock driveshaft than the '69/70s (I believe) so that probably won't work for me. My current shaft is 51" from joint to joint so I will assumably need a 50" shaft. I've tried to find out if a 2wd Expedition or pickup would have come w/ an alum shaft that length. Or, what the cost difference would be to cut/weld an alum shaft as opposed to steal. Anybody know.?

 

[Nosboss]

A friend of mine put a T-5 in his '65 fastback and was able to swap in a stock alum driveshaft from a 2wd Explorer. The early cars have a shorter stock driveshaft than the '69/70s (I believe) so that probably won't work for me. My current shaft is 51" from joint to joint so I will assumably need a 50" shaft. I've tried to find out if a 2wd Expedition or pickup would have come w/ an alum shaft that length. Or, what the cost difference would be to cut/weld an alum shaft as opposed to steal. Anybody know.?

Thats interesting to know that the 2wd explorer driveshaft is useable. Is it a direct swap or was his shortened? What year explorer?

 

[jcode68]

That $640 price tag is a bit high, but even if you can shave a couple hundred off, I would still investigate going hydraulic over cable. Once installed, they are troublefree, much like the hydraulic brake system. You may not have a fitment issue with your booster, so if that is the real reason you are looking hard at the cable setup, you should run it to ground first. I have read many threads on this forum about melted/siezed cables. Personally, I like to do a job once and not have to repeat it or worse yet, rip it out and go another direction at a later point.

 

[bdepedro]

NossBoss: He didn't have to cut the shaft but he may have just gotten lucky. I think you'd just have to see what length your shaft needs to be and hope it works. I don't know what year Explorer it's out of but I'll see if I can find out.

Jcode: I'm definitely going to shave as much off the total cost as I can. Fit is the main reason I'm not planning on going hyd but I'll definitely check to be certain that it won't fit before I abandon it completely. Now you got me worried about using a cable. I want to get the best performance I can as inexpensively as I can and don't want to deal w/ problems down the road if I can avoid them. Assuming I'm not going hyd, would you think staying w/ my mechanical linkage would be better than a cable system?

 

[jcode68]

While the old zbar linkage is very reliable, it is also antiquated and heavy on the leg. I personally would not go that direction because when I upgraded to the T5, I was looking for upgrade in the clutch pedal feel as well.
When I did my T5 and hydraulic clutch in my 68, my research uncovered the fitment issue with the brake booster like you mention. On the 67/68 cars, essentially the stock Bendix style booster is the only one (at least at that time) that would fit without issue. I didn't research for the 69 (I think that is what you have, correct?), but generally speaking the 69 has more room. So just check the facts and make sure you are not interpreting the 67/68 fitment requirements and assuming they are the same for the 69/70 cars. Maybe there are some guys on Stangnet that have done this combo that could shed some light. Also, compare the diameter of your booster against whe the factoryoem booster dimnension is. Bottom line is spend more time researching up front and you will have no regrets down the roard.

 

[67rcks]

Again, the clutch cannot be fitted 100% because you have exhaust pipe passing right in front of the opeining for the cable in the bellhousing (if you have stock manifolds or long tube headers). So you have to use a high tempo bondage, bend the cable letting it touch the exhaust pipe. obviously you cannot bend the pipe (if you wanted to have a straight route) because there is pitman arm in the way.

You can achieve a nice fit with some aftermarket shorties (yet I have not heard of any) that have exhaust flange pointing rearwards rather than down ( similar to right stock manifold).