Dick, thanks for your input. One thing I was a bit surprised about when
fixing my clutch was the similarity of size between the Koyo and RHP in
terms of O/D. I didn't examine it as closely as I might have liked to
due to time constraints though.
But, it appeared to me that the diameter of the Gunst was decently
(how's that for vagueness) smaller than the RHP, is that not so? Either
way, I can see how the smaller o/d of the Gunst would make the cranked
fingers irrelevant.
Thanks for the clarification.
And on a side note, when I have my engine rebuilt, I may switch over to
the B&B now that you've adequately explained the difference. Currently,
I'm lucky if I've got 100hp, but I plan to go close to 150hp when the
time comes.
Anyway, I would recommend staying away from the LUK unit. "That's my
story, and I'm sticking to it."
R. Ashford Little II
www.geocities.com/ralittle2
-----Original Message-----
From: Sally or Dick Taylor [mailto:tr6taylor@webtv.net]
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:26 PM
To: R. Ashford Little II
Cc: 'Robert "Doc" Dunkley'; 6-Pack; Triumphs@autox. Net
Subject: RE: Gunst and Sachs
Ashford---On the use of the B&B clutch with the Gunst bearing..The
"cranked" fingers on this clutch is irrelevant, as the diameter of the
Gunst is similar to the RHP. This means that the contact area between
the two is not on the finger angle, as is the KOYO.
It's possible that a soft (Sachs) clutch that has less clamping pressure
may not "hold" under some conditions where high torque transfer is
present. This has not been the case with the cranked B&B. (I DID find
this slippage in the B&B with flat diaphragm fingers, tho I'm not sure
why)
Dick
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|