How resistant is the thrust bearing to damage?
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 17 ft below sea level.
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
16 Posts
Hmm...
I guess I'm the idiot here.
You're right.
Cyl #4 is closest to the firewall.
The crank has 5 main bearings.
That makes the bearing we talked about #4.
Are you reading this too Robert O?
I guess I'm the idiot here.
You're right.
Cyl #4 is closest to the firewall.
The crank has 5 main bearings.
That makes the bearing we talked about #4.
Are you reading this too Robert O?
#14
Registered User
Originally Posted by SpitfireS,Jan 5 2011, 08:29 AM
Hmm...
I guess I'm the idiot here.
You're right.
Cyl #4 is closest to the firewall.
The crank has 5 main bearings.
That makes the bearing we talked about #4.
Are you reading this too Robert O?
I guess I'm the idiot here.
You're right.
Cyl #4 is closest to the firewall.
The crank has 5 main bearings.
That makes the bearing we talked about #4.
Are you reading this too Robert O?
#15
Originally Posted by SpitfireS,Jan 4 2011, 03:02 PM
* another reason not the start the enigne with the clutch in.
Besides - the added load would put additional strain on the starter, especially in cold weather.
#16
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
Lots of FI guys disable the clutch interlock so they can start the car in neutral with the clutch engaged. I don't see how it would put a signficant amount of additional load on the starter.
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 17 ft below sea level.
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
16 Posts
slalom44 Posted on Jan 6 2011, 11:18 PM
In my honest European opinion, the clutch-in-to-start-safety-feature is in the same catagory as the "This coffey might be hot" and "Don't microwave your pet" warnings signs.
Actually, I used to start all the manual cars I've owned with the clutch in: to start the engine you don't need to drag the gearbox along.
After reading a post (or a couple, I don't recall) about crank walk on S2k's with the old style ACT PP I decided to stop doing that.
What I do know for sure is that ACT changed the spring design to lower the disengagement force while clamping force decreased only slightly, at the cost of some travel, compared to the old style ACT PP.
IMO (no matter what PP you have): no load on the thrust is better than a load, during a cold start.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting here.
Actually, I used to start all the manual cars I've owned with the clutch in: to start the engine you don't need to drag the gearbox along.
After reading a post (or a couple, I don't recall) about crank walk on S2k's with the old style ACT PP I decided to stop doing that.
What I do know for sure is that ACT changed the spring design to lower the disengagement force while clamping force decreased only slightly, at the cost of some travel, compared to the old style ACT PP.
IMO (no matter what PP you have): no load on the thrust is better than a load, during a cold start.
#19
Originally Posted by gernby,Jan 6 2011, 03:11 PM
Lots of FI guys disable the clutch interlock so they can start the car in neutral with the clutch engaged. I don't see how it would put a signficant amount of additional load on the starter.
#20
Registered User
Originally Posted by SheDrivesIt,Jan 6 2011, 04:04 PM
Mostly irrelevant, I'd imagine. I've never really heard of there being a crank walk issue with S2000s.
You could ride your OEM clutch for years and not damage the thrust bearing surface.
Concider the fact that it only takes a couple hundred lbs to release the clutch pedal and the thrust is made from material and lubricated in the same way as the main and rod bearings. These surfaces see literal TONS of pressure on an ongoing basis. I guarantee you did not damage your thrust bearing in any way.
Also, find comfort in knowing that people run pressure plates twice as heavy as stock for thousands of miles of track mileage and abuse without damaging their thrust bearings.