Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I’m interested in the mustang Steve master kit including ball bearing pedal assembly, cable clutch system, and fox style power brake booster. I’m wondering if anyone has experience with this booster vs the other options out there...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
I have the booster pedal assembly with roller bearings and cable clutch setup with a 2001 v6 mustang master cylinder. AWESOME 😎
Replaced my factory power 4 drum single master cylinder that I ran for 27 plus years.

I did it for three reasons. First to update to dual bowl master. Second wanted to install rear disc brakes. Third was to install T5 transmission.

Both were used with 78 Granada discs (Granada proportioning valve) and factory rear drums (289).
Definitely worth the effort and time. I performed change with engine still in the car.

Last year I finally performed 5.0/T5 swap with cable clutch setup.
The only issue I ran into was my Hooker long tube headers 6901’s were smack dab in the cable route. I made a work-a-round for my headers to maintain the cable clutch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
Why would you go cable clutch if you have the option of hydraulic? Yes...its slightly more of a pain to set up initially, but in the end its much better for flexibility(hydraulic will fit any headers out there assuming you are running the lines yourself) and gives you reduced pedal effort...which you will appreciate if you ever drive in traffic
 

·
Dimples
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
I’ve got all of the MS mods listed and I love every part of it. The power brakes work great. I really did the booster as a “while I’m at it” kind of thing as I was mostly focused on the clutch mods, but it is all better than I could have hoped for

Why would you go cable clutch if you have the option of hydraulic? Yes...its slightly more of a pain to set up initially, but in the end its much better for flexibility(hydraulic will fit any headers out there assuming you are running the lines yourself) and gives you reduced pedal effort...which you will appreciate if you ever drive in traffic
I love the simplicity of the cable and mine has worked flawlessly for 11 years. I had a friend that fought his hydraulic clutch for years, so I went with simple and effective. Also, the pedal feel is fantastic with the right clutch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Why would you go cable clutch if you have the option of hydraulic? Yes...its slightly more of a pain to set up initially, but in the end its much better for flexibility(hydraulic will fit any headers out there assuming you are running the lines yourself) and gives you reduced pedal effort...which you will appreciate if you ever drive in traffic
Isn’t hydraulic also significantly more expensive?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
I’ve got all of the MS mods listed and I love every part of it. The power brakes work great. I really did the booster as a “while I’m at it” kind of thing as I was mostly focused on the clutch mods, but it is all better than I could have hoped for



I love the simplicity of the cable and mine has worked flawlessly for 11 years. I had a friend that fought his hydraulic clutch for years, so I went with simple and effective. Also, the pedal feel is fantastic with the right clutch.
Like I said...more of a PITA to set up initially...but hydraulic clutches are perfectly reliable(as evidenced by the one in my Mazda 6 which is now around 275k miles on it). No cables to stretch...no worries about headers burning them up, etc etc.

Isn’t hydraulic also significantly more expensive?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

🤷 it depends on what you mean by expensive...you can buy a master cylinder, a slave cylinder, and a braided stainless line to connect the two for $150 or less....probably a different matter if you buy a "kit" from someone...but I wouldn't buy a kit anyway, not if you have a power booster anyway, since all the hydraulic clutch "kits" on the market tend to locate the master cylinder poorly and often wont fit with a lot of the boosters. Far better off to start from scratch and design the system to fit around whatever braking system you have...you have a lot of options if you build the system yourself..there is nothing difficult about hydraulic clutches...they work exactly the same way as the brakes in your car....I don't see anyone saying hydraulic brakes are unreliable...most of the time people have problems with hydraulic clutch systems is when they do things like running a line above the master cylinder(just like brakes, running a line above the master cylinder makes it VERY difficult to get all the air out)....or they don't properly bleed the system...or they use a poor quality slave cylinder(I bought an el-cheapo slave from Autozone for an old eclipse of mine and it lasted maybe 15k miles before the pedal started sticking....replacing it with an OEM unit made the problem dissapear)....these are all the same issues people run into with brake systems...the only difference in a clutch system vs a brake system is that in a brake system the slave cylinder is called a "caliper" or a "drum" but its still the same thing
 

·
Dimples
Joined
·
3,646 Posts
Like I said...more of a PITA to set up initially...but hydraulic clutches are perfectly reliable(as evidenced by the one in my Mazda 6 which is now around 275k miles on it). No cables to stretch...no worries about headers burning them up, etc etc.
I’m not trying to convince you of anything man. You asked and I gave you a thoughtful answer. Like I said, I’m on the same cable that I started with over a decade ago. It seems like you want a clutch cable to be inferior and I’m offering a personal account that says otherwise. Enjoy your more expensive and complicated solution, I guess?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
I’m not trying to convince you of anything man. You asked and I gave you a thoughtful answer. Like I said, I’m on the same cable that I started with over a decade ago. It seems like you want a clutch cable to be inferior and I’m offering a personal account that says otherwise. Enjoy your more expensive and complicated solution, I guess?
Clutch cables aren't inferior by any means, I have had clutch cables that have lasted 20+ years as well...but by that metric a Z-bar is the way to go...we know that they last 50+ years after all(and to be honest, a solid mechanical linkage really IS the best assuming its riding on smooth bearings, but no one bothers to design one to fit whatever transmission they swap in). All I am trying to convince people of is that a hydraulic clutch is NOT expensive, OR complicated. Most everyone here is able to handle bleeding brakes right? A hydraulic clutch is no different. As for price...a Modern Driveline cable clutch conversion is $269 vs $294 for hydraulic....that really isn't much monetary difference for the flexibility you gain(making your own kit though you will probably come out about $60-$80 cheaper with cable vs hydraulic....still not much monetary difference). Things start to get more complicated when your slave cylinder is a Hydraulic TOB since its inside the trans and very inconvenient to change and can be messy to bleed....but for transmissions with a hydraulic TOB they don't have the option of a cable or mechanical clutch anyway without heavy modification.

Cable clutches are simple...but so is hydraulic....and z-bar. If you really wanted to, you could even design an electric clutch using some type of position sensor on the clutch pedal and a stepper motor to drive the arm on the trans.....would never have to bleed it, cable would never stretch....might have to swap out the stepper motor every few hundred thousand miles is about it(I am actually shocked the OEMs aren't already doing that). The pedal could be light as a feather too....but you would have to have some type of computer to run it...even if it was just a black box with a processor and a few resistors and flip-flops.

I don't consider any actuation solution to be superior(all of them have drawbacks and advantages)....but I do feel that hydraulic maintains the best balance of simplicity and flexibility when it comes to vintage mustangs. Just look at all the willl X header fit with this cable or that Z-bar threads there are and you can see why I feel that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Clutch cables aren't inferior by any means, I have had clutch cables that have lasted 20+ years as well...but by that metric a Z-bar is the way to go...we know that they last 50+ years after all(and to be honest, a solid mechanical linkage really IS the best assuming its riding on smooth bearings, but no one bothers to design one to fit whatever transmission they swap in). All I am trying to convince people of is that a hydraulic clutch is NOT expensive, OR complicated. Most everyone here is able to handle bleeding brakes right? A hydraulic clutch is no different. As for price...a Modern Driveline cable clutch conversion is $269 vs $294 for hydraulic....that really isn't much monetary difference for the flexibility you gain(making your own kit though you will probably come out about $60-$80 cheaper with cable vs hydraulic....still not much monetary difference). Things start to get more complicated when your slave cylinder is a Hydraulic TOB since its inside the trans and very inconvenient to change and can be messy to bleed....but for transmissions with a hydraulic TOB they don't have the option of a cable or mechanical clutch anyway without heavy modification.

Cable clutches are simple...but so is hydraulic....and z-bar. If you really wanted to, you could even design an electric clutch using some type of position sensor on the clutch pedal and a stepper motor to drive the arm on the trans.....would never have to bleed it, cable would never stretch....might have to swap out the stepper motor every few hundred thousand miles is about it(I am actually shocked the OEMs aren't already doing that). The pedal could be light as a feather too....but you would have to have some type of computer to run it...even if it was just a black box with a processor and a few resistors and flip-flops.

I don't consider any actuation solution to be superior(all of them have drawbacks and advantages)....but I do feel that hydraulic maintains the best balance of simplicity and flexibility when it comes to vintage mustangs. Just look at all the willl X header fit with this cable or that Z-bar threads there are and you can see why I feel that way.
I’m intrigued by the idea of building my own hydraulic clutch set up... does it require a specific clutch pedal set up, or could one use any pedal assembly (ie Mustang Steve)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
731 Posts
I’m intrigued by the idea of building my own hydraulic clutch set up... does it require a specific clutch pedal set up, or could one use any pedal assembly (ie Mustang Steve)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The clutch pedal itself doesn’t change. It’s the master cylinder and rod linkage where things get tricky.
DazeCars and ModernDriveline have slightly different ways of doing it.
Basically it’s finding the right balance of pedal throw vs pedal effort. And the rod linkage has to allow for the correct amount of travel without binding.

I purchased the Daze kit although I haven’t installed it yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Wicked, I thought about going hydraulic as well, but I was able to reuse my existing 5.0/T5 from my 92 with just a crossmember change. Upgrading booster/master cylinder for rear discs nudged me in this direction as well. The 2001 v6 Master/fox booster stops far superior with Granada/289 rear drums (10”)than a factory fox brake setup disc/drum (9”). I was able to install my rear discs last month, which was my final plan for the Mustang Steve brake/clutch assembly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
I’m intrigued by the idea of building my own hydraulic clutch set up... does it require a specific clutch pedal set up, or could one use any pedal assembly (ie Mustang Steve)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As MrFlash said...the basic pedal is the same regardless of which route you go. What really needs to be considered is whether you have a power booster you need to avoid or not...and there are several ways of doing so:

1. You can stand install a stand-off on the stock pedal that will reach far enough around whatever booster you are using(both Daze and Modern Driveline do this in different ways...the Modern Driveline kit also makes use of a Bell Crank setup to keep the pushrod angle good...which looks nice but probably doesn't have all that much more of a practical difference than the simple stand-off Daze uses.

2. Another solution is to use a reverse swing master cylinder and mount it under the dash. Obviously if you do it this way, you will want to take extra time and care to ensure there are no leaks...you would use a remote reservoir to fill the system.


The one pictured above is not remote-resevoir....so not a good choice for in-car installation....but its just a visual example. An advantage of reverse swing master cylinders is that it doesn't matter which booster you use since interference there is no longer an issue(though under-dash interference might be). You can actually use any master cylinder under the dash and make it reverse swing by mounting the pushrod above the pedal pivot point(some welding required I am sure to get the correct throw since the stock pedal doesnt extend high enough above the pivot).


If I were to design my own kit though, what I would do is simply use a stand-off on the stock pedal at whichever point gave me the throw I was looking for and use a bell-crank to correct the angle if needed(probably not even needed with a master cylinder pushrod...I doubt depressing the clutch pedal changes the angle enough to matter).


Don't bother to read the following paragraph unless you are interested in bell cranks:
Bell cranks are easy to make devices that change a given input angle into a desired output angle anywhere from 0-360 degrees(The factory Z-rod is a type of bell crank...as is the factory throttle pedal assembly). All bell cranks have a rotating center and often have 2 attachment points...one at the input angle and one at the output angle...the distance they are from the center of the rotating assembly determines the final throw....you can have the input point further out on the circle and the output point further in to reduce a throw...or vice versa to increase a throw....or have them equidistant to maintain the same throw while changing the angle. The angle is changed by the point of the circle those attachment points are....if you want to change the angle by 15 degrees....simply separate the attachment points by 15 degrees around the circumference of the circle. The circle itself can be imaginary...anything with 2 arms and a pivot point works. This is the bell crank modern driveline uses:


The "center" of the circle in this case is the pivot where it attaches to the firewall bracket at the bottom. The input point is where the clutch pedal attaches to the other end and the output point being the clutch master cylinder pushrod. Note that the input and outpoint points are at different distances from the "center" of the bell crank...meaning what they are doing here is shortening the throw because the attachment point at the pedal provides too much throw for whatever master cylinder they are using....they are also separating the attachment angles by what looks to be maybe 20-25 degrees. The reason the didn't just mount the hole lower on the pedal is that doing so would have just increased a throw that was already too long and going higher would cause the distance from the pivot to increase...requiring more throw. Since the pivot is mounted low and center, they couldnt use 2 attachment arms without possibly interfering with the pushrod so instead they used one arm and curved it to act the same as 2 arms(a cleaner way to do it anyway)

Anyway, the whole topic of bell cranks is something you can read up on, but its also something you should probably understand in theory if designing your own system because it will be critical to keep the clutch master cylinder pushrod as horizontal as possible throughout the range of its movement. It will also let you select an master cylinder with a throw as close as you can get to your pedal attachment point throw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Wicked, I see you’re installing 3.7.
Natural, turbo, or super charged?
Have a build thread on it?
Thought of that too.👍🏼
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
Wicked, I see you’re installing 3.7.
Natural, turbo, or super charged?
Have a build thread on it?
Thought of that too.👍🏼
Build thread here:

For the moment its NA using equal length longtubes and ITBs(working those two tasks at the same time) but I have specifically designed the headers(and the rest of the build) to allow me room to run coldside pipes from remote-mount turbos at some point in the future if I decide I need more power...to start with the ITBs wont have an airbox, just individual filters...but the eventual plan is for a sealed airbox there as well to allow the option of boost...it really depends on whether I can hit the goal of 350HP NA without cracking a head bolt whether I go turbo or not. I like the 3.7L, its a great little engine...but the requirements of custom headers and oil pan would likely keep most people from choosing it for a swap candidate...but hey, at least there is no shock tower modification needed for it.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top