DSMTalk Forums: Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon Forum banner
41 - 49 of 49 Posts
Do you know how the twin disc clutch setup would work on a shep stage 4 tranny that will be used for Road Racing. I know they are great for drag racing just not sure about road racing. I was told they liked to be slipped a lot so they heat up. It road racing I wouldn't be doing a lot of that.

Thanks
 
e_miller81 said:
Do you know how the twin disc clutch setup would work on a shep stage 4 tranny that will be used for Road Racing. I know they are great for drag racing just not sure about road racing. I was told they liked to be slipped a lot so they heat up. It road racing I wouldn't be doing a lot of that.

Thanks
If I remember correctly, QM's were origionally designed as a circle track/non drag racing clutch. I would assume it would hold up well for road racing also.
 
project_tsi said:
Jake, have you any experience or info on the PTT conical TOB? Ken Davis swears by it, when using the QM. He also stated that no grinding of the clutch fork is necessary when using the conical TOB. Just wondering if you have any info on this.
This conical bearing is making me want the PTT clutch more over the QM. I realize they are almost the same but the bearing is supposed to give you more of a window of engaugement. I thought you were not able to use it on the QM?

Which clutch is better QM or PTT?...haha decisions decisions! :confused:
 
Black94DSM said:
This conical bearing is making me want the PTT clutch more over the QM. I realize they are almost the same but the bearing is supposed to give you more of a window of engaugement. I thought you were not able to use it on the QM?

Which clutch is better QM or PTT?...haha decisions decisions! :confused:
Ken Davis ran the PTT conical bearing on his QM setup and praised it. He says and I quote "The flat surface of the oem bearing rides on just the edge of the twin disc fingers creating a very poor contact point and basically putting all the stress on the end of the TOB which not only causes it to fail quicker but to give you a very poor modulation of the pedal. By using the conical pieces the entire surface of the TOB is contacting the fingers and gives a MUCH NICER pedal modulation and also keeps you from hardcore grinding on the clutch fork(creating another weak point). I had the oem bearing and then swapped to steves conical when he finally released it. MAN it was a huge differece! I recommend it highly." End quote.

The PTT and QM setups are nearly the same setup, the thickness of the flywheel and pressure plates differ but that is about it.
 
project_tsi said:
Ken Davis ran the PTT conical bearing on his QM setup and praised it. He says and I quote "The flat surface of the oem bearing rides on just the edge of the twin disc fingers creating a very poor contact point and basically putting all the stress on the end of the TOB which not only causes it to fail quicker but to give you a very poor modulation of the pedal. By using the conical pieces the entire surface of the TOB is contacting the fingers and gives a MUCH NICER pedal modulation and also keeps you from hardcore grinding on the clutch fork(creating another weak point). I had the oem bearing and then swapped to steves conical when he finally released it. MAN it was a huge differece! I recommend it highly." End quote.

The PTT and QM setups are nearly the same setup, the thickness of the flywheel and pressure plates differ but that is about it.
I knew that. Is there an advantage of having a thicker flywheel/pressure plate. Which one is thicker?

The one thing I like about the PTT is they counter sink the bolts holding in the pressure plate, so you dont have the issue of the bolts hitting the clutch fork.

Sorry to clutter this thread up with the PTT clutch questions.
 
Yeah I liked that too about the PTT countersunk bolts. I'm not sure on which is thicker and thinner, I haven't been able to review them side by side.

Ken also stated that when using the PTT conical TOB, no grinding on the fork was required on is QM unit.

Also, I will be going with the QM unit for sure, when I can get it for $750 brand spankin new its the obvious choice.
 
project_tsi said:
Yeah I liked that too about the PTT countersunk bolts. I'm not sure on which is thicker and thinner, I haven't been able to review them side by side.

Ken also stated that when using the PTT conical TOB, no grinding on the fork was required on is QM unit.

Also, I will be going with the QM unit for sure, when I can get it for $750 brand spankin new its the obvious choice.
Kinda back from the dead.

Where can you get the QM for $750?
 
41 - 49 of 49 Posts