The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Driveline new install trans grinding

Hi Guys, 1950 1/2 ton. I have a new engine that I installed. Previously I had a 216 and I installed a 235. I also had the steering column out to paint. I put everything back together and did not change the 3 speed column shifter rod lengths. Now, when I try to get it into first gear there is much grinding but I can force it in. Getting it into the other gears also difficult. I read some post and read that using 90w oil is good because it helps to stop the gears from turning. I originally had used 90w/140 because I could not readily find straight 90w. This forum recommended from tractor supply ford tractor transmission oil 90w, mineral. I change to this oil but notice that it did not seem so thick. I recall 20 years ago when I last filled my transmission, the 90w was super thick. So the 90w oil did not solve my problem. The engine seems to be turning the transmission when it is idling. I back out the fork all the way so that is was not putting any pressure on the clutch but it did not change. I did not replace the clutch or disk because they seem like they had many more miles left. Is it possible to interchange the 216 and 235 clutch? I believe the fly wheels are different, it has been awhile since I installed the engine and transmission but I am pretty sure that I used the 235 fry wheel and clutch.
Before I go and remove the transmission to inspect things, any recommendations on what else to look at or things to try or check? I should also mention that I am using the push button starter. this is the last thing that is keeping me from driving my truck after a long rebuild.

thanks,
skipper

If you had the transmission hanging from the input shaft when you removed the engine, you may have bent the center section of the disk, which would cause it to drag on the flywheel and pressure plate. Not real likely, but a possibility. Did you put in a new pilot bearing in the flywheel? That may be hanging up, causing the gears to turn even if the clutch is disengaged.
I think you will need to remove the trans in any case to figure out what's wrong.
Also, if you backed off the clutch linkage, you may have caused the linkage to not have enough movement to totally disengage the clutch when the pedal is to the floor. That would be the first thing I would check. Adjust the linkage to spec (the pedal should have just a little play before the throwout bearing contacts the fingers on the pressure plate.)

BTW, 90W isn't thicker than 90W/140. The 90 weight will actually be thinner when warm than 90w/140, which has viscosity index improving additives to keep it from thinning out as much when warm. It acts like 90w when cold and 140 when warm.
I hope you can get the grinding issue figured out.

Was the clutch removed during the engine swap? One common mistake on assembly is putting the clutch disc in backwards so the springs in the center hub catch on the flywheel bolts and cause the clutch disc to spin even with the pedal fully depressed. If you force the trans into gear, or engage the transmission with the engine stopped and start the engine with the clutch pedal down, a backwards clutch usually makes a rattling noise as the springs rub the bolt heads. A bent disc, as Kevin describes is also a definite possibility.

Remove the dust cover and look up at the flywheel/clutch assembly while a helper holds the clutch pedal down. There should be enough of a gap between the pressure plate and the clutch disc to turn the disc easily with the tip of a screwdriver. If not, either adjust the linkage for more clearance, or take it all apart and look for bent, damaged, or improperly installed parts.
Jerry

Perhaps a very light smear of lithium grease on the nipple of the input shaft? In 2015 when I was removing and installing the transmission in my '65, because of rebuilding the one, installing the spare, needing to tear apart the the rebuilt because of issues, and reinstalling the spare, it wouldn't go into reverse, and first was grinding like you mention. I unbolted the trans, put a very small bad of lithium grease on the input shaft nipple, and no more issues going into gear. I later found out the pilot bushings are oil-impregnated, so I guess it may have just been a little surface rust or something on the nipple. Either way, that may be your problem, and a whole lot easier than removing the clutch if you don't need to. Start with the easy stuff and move up to the more difficult stuff.

If the pilot tip of the transmission is binding in the pilot bushing of the new engine, then the input shaft remains energized by the engine crank even though the clutch disc is disengaged (if the engine is running). That situation makes shifting very difficult if not impossible when the engine is running. However, when the engine is off everything will shift normally. Just a possibility.

Hey guys I cannot believe its been over a month since I first posted my issue. A lot has happened, all be it rather slow. I did buy a new 9-1/8" clutch kit from NAPA. It was a LUK and it looked pretty modern, different than my old clutch. I battled with removing the old pilot bearing but finally got it out. I installed the new clutch kit and there was no more grinding going into the gears. With the drive shaft not connected I can see the u-joint on the transmission stop spinning when I engage the clutch. I think the old clutch spring was just worn, it was dumb of my not to have replaced it from the get go.
I know have another issue, when shifting to first gear, when I engage the clutch, the clutch fork pivots back and will interfere with the shift rod. With the engine off and not pressing the clutch I can shift the column shifter to all the gears easy. Pressing on the clutch pedal and moving it into 1st the interference prevents the shifting. I had never noticed how close the long shifting rod is to the fork. I also see if I shift into 1st slow enough to see what is happening, it also makes contact with the 2-3rd shifting arm.
Looking down at the transmission, the 1st gear arm on the trans looked like it may have been bent towards the transmission. This would I believe make the interference worse. So, I pulled the transmission out and removed the arm to inspect. It actually looked straight but I bent it alittle away from the trans.
I put it all back together and I see that now there is less interference but not all gone. I know the arms are in the correct location as to the books. one thing that I see is that with the new clutch, the adjustment screw for the fork, is seems that it needs to me not in center of the L shape threaded arm but further down near the end of the thread. I have the the adjuster kind of in the middle and there still is interference.
Not sure what I have to do or what I did incorrectly. Has anyone had similar problem??? I can try to take a picture if that helps.

Post pictures. If possible.

Ed

Are you sure you have the linkage correct? I looked at mine and the clutch rod clears by quite a bit. I’ll post some pictures of my ‘52 3100 w/three speed on the tree so you can compare.

I had a similar problem on my 48 after replacing engines. It turned out that the bell housing wasn't centered with the transmission. I talked to a old mechanic from the late 40's. He told me it was a common problem back then. GM had a special tool to line the bell housing to the fly wheel. You would remove the dowel pins between the engine and bell housing loosen the bell housing bolts, install the tool then tighten the bolts and re drill the dowel pin holes to a larger size. Of course not able to find the tool he had me remove the clutch, place a magnetic dial indicator on the flywheel and center the transmission hole to the bell housing. Tighten the bell housing bolts and re drill the dowel pin holes to a larger size. It was out about .020.That was back in 1980 and it still works today. I also learned the pilot bushing is oil-impregnated and using chassis lube will make it stick.

Here are some pics. I did not get a shot of the bell housing crank arm, I will do that tomorrow. From your picture Phil I think I got my linkage correct but the actual crank arm looks different on mine. I mentioned in the first post that I installed a 235. The previous motor was a 216 (ran like a watch) and before that was also a 216. I am using the 216 bell housing and flywheel with the push button starter. The bell crank, transmission and shifting rods are all the same parts as before the 235 transplant. Could there be a difference between a 235 and 216 bell crank? I know that I am using my 216 gas pedal but the rod that goes from the bell crank on the block does not mate with the carburetor accelerator rod, as an example of possible differenced. I believe I need a rod for the automatic choke carb.
I tried to capture on the pictures the interference of the 1st gear rod on the 2nd-3rd trans arm. It is just slight although it might be a little sloppy with out the springs on the rod. If the tran is in 1st gear and I am trying to shift to neutral, I step on the clutch and trying to bring up the column shifter to neutral, the shift rod will interfere on the fork which is back because of stepping on the clutch. You can see that in the pictures.
The off centered bell housing and fly wheel theory is interesting, I hope that is not the issue as it may be difficult to check with the engine in the truck. Can it be the clutch kit itself. I wish I would have taken down the measurements but the new clutch did seem not as tall as the old one. Although it would also mater how the TB location compares to the old one. I am thinking that if because the clutch is not as tall as before, now the TB is closer to the fly wheel, which means the fork is pivoted in more to begin with and the adjustment end of the fork is further back. Note sure if that makes sense. The NAPA kit was NCF 1104123. Perhaps I have the fork adjustment incorrect? Maybe the rods at the column box has to be adjusted?

As long as you have the same transmission, bell housing, bell crank and shifting rods, it should operate just like the old 216. Logic has it, something has changed.

Did you have the bell crank off of the bell housing? I have the 216 bell housing, same tranny, same three on the tree, same 235 transplant, basically the same setup as yours. I just reinstalled my 235 after a rebuild and I installed the bell crank incorrectly. It felt good shifting while I was sitting in my garage, with the engine off, but didn't work on the road. It would change the location of the second third-linkage a bit. Take that picture of yours so we can compare. Mine I posted in one of my previous posts.

The clutch adjustment should have about 3/4 to 1 inch of free pedal travel.

Here are some pictures of the bell crank. I believe is does look like the one Phil pictures shows. I did try to adjust the clutch pedal to be the 3/4-1" before the fork begins to push on the TB. To get this, I have to adjust the adjuster so that it is at the end of the thread. Which does not seem correct as it probably should be near the center. But if I put it in the center then the pedal is a lot of travel. One thing I also notice is that the return spring I got from one of the vendors does not seem to be very strong. It kind of weakly returns the clutch pedal up, not sure is this is a issue.

Your setup looks just like mine except the clutch adjustment rod. I can’t tell you, if you have the correct clutch installed. Maybe one of our experts can help you with this. I know that there is several sizes available. Mine calls for a 9” clutch and I don’t know if a 1/4” makes a difference or not. But with the linkage appearing to be correct, the clutch is now suspect especially since you just changed it. Another supporting factor, is that the adjustment changed so drastically indicating that the stack height of the pressure plate, clutch disk and throwout bearing is smaller that the one you removed, necessitating the adjustment. That would move the fork back toward the rear of the truck causing your problem.

Are you sure that you assembled the clutch and throw out bearing correctly? I know there have been other “Bolters” that had the disk in backwards. My clutch disk had “This side toward flywheel” stamped on one side.

Do you have the old clutch to compare it too?

[edit] the return spring on mine is fairly weak also, but it does fully return the pedal.

At any rate, its worth dropping the inspection cover to relook at it.

It looks like you have the wrong throwout bearing installed The "released" position of the throwout arm should be near the front of the slot. If the bearing is too short, the forked end of the arm is going to have to pivot forward a long way to put the bearing into contact with the clutch fingers, which puts the outboard end too close to the shift rods..
Jerry

These are the only pictures I took of the new clutch. I will have to compare the two TB.

The thing that jumps out of that picture is the diameter difference in the hole in the diaphragm spring. That's going to change the whole geometry of the linkage operation, unless a matching throwout bearing is used, diameter-wise as well as length. Did you buy the clutch assembly as a "kit", or did you source the pieces individually? That big spring hub on the clutch disc should be going back into the pressure plate, not facing the flywheel like you have it in the picture on the right.
Jerry

I believe I found the problem. The new TB looks to be similar in size with the old one. I measured the height of the old clutch body with the new clutch and there is about 1/2" difference meaning the new clutch is shorter. So, I assuming the TB is 1/2" closer to the fly wheel which will then pivot the fork that much forward too. I have to remove everything to measure properly but I think that is the issue.
The clutch I ordered from a kit (see previous post picture) from NAPA. It specifically said it fits my truck. I am definitely disappointed with NAPA as I went with them because they usually always had parts for my truck on the self. Now I have to remove the transmission for the third time and I'm an old guy:(

So, I pulled the clutch at lunch and examined and compared the two clutches. The new clutch was shorter but the spring fingers extend upward, unlike the old clutch were they are flatter. When I placed the TB on each of the clutch springs and measured the distance from the face of the clutch to the end of the TB, both clutches were very close in dimension. Maybe a half a millimeter differnce. Then I thought about the fork and the socket ball could the be really worn. The ball looks a little worn I will replace it with a new one. The fork, I looked around and did not see vendors selling these. I am wondering if I add a spacer between the socket and the base of the bell housing I can buy a little bit space to move the fork arm forward. I do not know if they sell taller socket balls.
The clutch itself design wise is different from the old one. Looking at different vendor web sites I see some carry the same LUK clutch I am using as well as the older style. May be I need to use the older style clutch? Any thoughts on this?

I’m sure you are aware, but for others following there are 2 different throw out bearings. Long and short along with 2 different pressure plates. One with fingers and the other like yours. The bearings are not interchangeable.

The measurement should be from where the pressure plate contacts the flywheel to where the clutch fork contacts the throwout bearing. I’m not sure that is what you meant.

If you're measuring the depth of the diaphragm spring with the pressure plate off the flywheel, you're guessing in the dark. To get a good comparison, the clutch disc and pressure plate would need to be bolted to the flywheel, and the distance from the transmission mounting face of the bellhousing to the spring fingers would need to be measured for both old and new assemblies. A badly worm clutch facing would make the old assembly measure a little bit shorter than a new one of the same design. If there's a noticeably longer measurement on the new assembly, it would account for the different position of the fork.
Jerry

I had the clutches laying flat and measured from the flat to the top of the TB. It is kind of difficult to see the reading in one picture but they are also identical. I did not know there were two types of clutches besides the 9-1/8" and the 10". Now I see that some vendors do have the old style clutch which requires a core. When I bought this from NAPA, they did not seem to have the other style option. It seem like the 10" clutch all come in the old style. Does anyone have a part number for the longer TB to use with the new clutch I am using? Does anyone have a suggestion for a clutch kit to use that will work? I know that Autozone and Carquest carry a clutch kit, it may be the same as the one I have now? What abou the fork and ball socket, do they look excessively worn?

The larger throwout bearing measures 1-7/8” and the short one measures about 1-1/4”. Aside from that, I don’t know about the different clutches to be of any help.

The clutch fork pivot ball doesn't appear to have enough wear to cause your problem. Having said that, since its already out, you might as well replace it and eliminate that possibility.

"I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you!" Your measurement procedure is fatally flawed without having things bolted together.
Jerry

What Jerry is saying is when you bolt the pressure plate to the flywheel, and it compresses the clutch fingers, it may be different on the two different clutches. I understand that would involve bolting both clutches to the flywheel under the truck or removing the flywheel to get that measurement. However, if both clutch stack height (clutch pressure, plate and throwout bearing) match (where the clutch fork makes contact), that would tell you if the new clutch is the problem.

Did you measure your throwout bearing?

Yes, I see what you mean. I will bolt on the clutch and take the measurement again as the fingers may compress some. Looking through some other threads, I do see that other people have used this LUK clutch with success.

So, I installed both clutches/disc on the fly wheel. Measuring from the end of the TB to the fly wheel, the new clutch is .49" shorter. The new clutch, I did notice the when tightening the clutch to the fly wheel, the finders do compress down, thus losing the .49". I will be looking for the old style, flat finger clutch. I have only seen them available from the classic truck vendors and not the local auto parts stores. They are more expensive and require mailing in a rebuildable core. Does anyone know where I can get one new Santa Clara, CA or perhaps have my old one rebuilt? Anyone have a suggestion for a truck vendor for the clutch?

There are at least two different lengths of the collar that slides on the snout of the transmission input bearing retainer. The throwout bearing itself is pressed onto that sliding collar, so it would be possible to fabricate a longer bearing carrier to move the TB closer to the clutch fingers if you can't find a longer one somewhere. It would be a pretty simple operation for anyone with a lathe and a little machining knowledge.
Jerry

We ran into the same problem with a Napa sourced assembly which wasn't even close. I was able to obtain the correct "flat diaphragm" pressure plate from a local source for a 57 V-8 truck and a core wasn't required. Clutches Unlimited in Midway City, CA 714-373-6155, likely has one for your application as well. I'm sure there would be shipping costs. There has to be a clutch rebuilder in the bay area. That would be my first recommended option.
Fred

Try HR Clutch in Bensalem, PA. Yes, I know, shipping. But this is a second generation clutch shop and they have been rebuilding my clutches and pressure plates for a good many years (30 plus). The last one the did for me was an old Schieffer high performance diaphragm pressure plate that I ran for years. Turns out they likely built it originally as they were the source for all of the Schieffer products when George Hurst purchase Schieffer and moved them to Glenside pa. Little more expensive but worth it I think to not have to go through the aggravation you are going through at the moment.

http://hrclutch.com/