Please - Let's not turn this into a hydraulic clutch bash. I am looking to understand whether my observation that clutch arm freeplay goes away after a few shifts represents what is called the tendency to "self adjust" on other threads on this topic. Basically is this is a probnlem, or just "is"?
I did the hydraulic clutch conversion on my G5 project. (I've been happy feel and reliability of the clutch on my V11, and I wanted the left and right bars to match). After a few weeks sorting out various things, I've noticed that after several shifts, the normal bit of "freeplay" at the clutch arm is gone. Ive adjusted the clutch screw numerous times to get to spec (say 3/16" gap) between the clutch arm and the slave cylinder fitting), but after a few shifts the tolerance vanishes. When I push the clutch arm forward to observe the freeplay, there isn't much or any. It is not at the hard part of the push that engages the clutch, but there is no gap between the clutch arm and the slave cylinder fitting. I cannot rule out that the clutch pushrod is in contact with the clutch - though there wouldn't be very much force. I can restore the normal freeplay by pushing the clutch arm back, but it will vanish again after a few shifts.
Yesterday I went to the local ACE Hardware and got a selection of springs to supplement or replace the current one. I figure the clutch spring doesn't act on much lever arm, and the O-ring seals on the slave cylinder have more friction than a cable clutch. For those that have them, I observe the slave cylinder is hard to move in and out by hand, and FWIW, I think it is meaningless to talk about the relative magnitude of cable friction vs. frictional losses of hydraulic fluid in the lines - it is all about the O-rings and they've got to have a bit of friction or they'd leak. I'm not much of a mechanic, but this is consistent with the clutch slave cylinders I've had on cars, as well as hydraulic brakes on cars and bikes which seem to me to be the same concept. Anyway I made sure the slave cylinder walls were clean, then added a second spring that fits outside the stock spring. The combined spring force was definitely stiffer, and perhaps the 150% of stock that you'd get by summing the coil wire gauge of the two springs). Ther second spring had no observable impact on clutch pull or the tendency for the freeplay to go away. I would have to significnatly increase the spring constant or move to an extension spring at the end of the clutch arm for this to change. This is easily doable.
Before moving on to other and stiffer springs, I though I'd ask people knowledgeable with this sort of thing (esp folks who have done this conversion and had acceptable clutch life) whether this represents a problem (clutch pushrod causing short clutch life), or whether this just goes with the territory and hydraulic clutches behave this way?
I'll post this over on the other forums as well. I appreciate your help.
Dennis
I did the hydraulic clutch conversion on my G5 project. (I've been happy feel and reliability of the clutch on my V11, and I wanted the left and right bars to match). After a few weeks sorting out various things, I've noticed that after several shifts, the normal bit of "freeplay" at the clutch arm is gone. Ive adjusted the clutch screw numerous times to get to spec (say 3/16" gap) between the clutch arm and the slave cylinder fitting), but after a few shifts the tolerance vanishes. When I push the clutch arm forward to observe the freeplay, there isn't much or any. It is not at the hard part of the push that engages the clutch, but there is no gap between the clutch arm and the slave cylinder fitting. I cannot rule out that the clutch pushrod is in contact with the clutch - though there wouldn't be very much force. I can restore the normal freeplay by pushing the clutch arm back, but it will vanish again after a few shifts.
Yesterday I went to the local ACE Hardware and got a selection of springs to supplement or replace the current one. I figure the clutch spring doesn't act on much lever arm, and the O-ring seals on the slave cylinder have more friction than a cable clutch. For those that have them, I observe the slave cylinder is hard to move in and out by hand, and FWIW, I think it is meaningless to talk about the relative magnitude of cable friction vs. frictional losses of hydraulic fluid in the lines - it is all about the O-rings and they've got to have a bit of friction or they'd leak. I'm not much of a mechanic, but this is consistent with the clutch slave cylinders I've had on cars, as well as hydraulic brakes on cars and bikes which seem to me to be the same concept. Anyway I made sure the slave cylinder walls were clean, then added a second spring that fits outside the stock spring. The combined spring force was definitely stiffer, and perhaps the 150% of stock that you'd get by summing the coil wire gauge of the two springs). Ther second spring had no observable impact on clutch pull or the tendency for the freeplay to go away. I would have to significnatly increase the spring constant or move to an extension spring at the end of the clutch arm for this to change. This is easily doable.
Before moving on to other and stiffer springs, I though I'd ask people knowledgeable with this sort of thing (esp folks who have done this conversion and had acceptable clutch life) whether this represents a problem (clutch pushrod causing short clutch life), or whether this just goes with the territory and hydraulic clutches behave this way?
I'll post this over on the other forums as well. I appreciate your help.
Dennis
