The clutch doesn't seem to be fully engaging. It typically shifts with 0 issues, but sometimes can't get into second when downshifting and from a stop, starting with the pedal up I'm having to use the synchros in 1st or second to slow/stop the input shaft before sliding it into gear. My leading theory is a bit of air in the remote bleeder hose as the transmission, slave, pressure plate, flywheel, etc. are all setup as the would have been from the factory on a Camaro. I really should just grab a friend and a wrench and confirm/fix that.
clutch: i think you meant to say it isnt fully DISengaging. As for that issue, I have a feeling the stock s10 clutch master/pedal system doesn't have quite the travel it "should" have from a mechanical design perspective.with the 2 clutch swaps (3 if you count re-doing it once with the same parts) I'm convinced that a brand new clutch is going to drag for the first several hundred miles of "wear" which knocks down the high points on the friction disk(i had the same issue every time, regardless of how much bleeding and stackup measurements i did, but it eventually fixed itself (i think from wear as mentioned))
Yup. Not fully disengaging. Sometimes just writing my thoughts down has me thinking through it more. The pedal is firm, so a bad bleed doesn't really line up. Leaves, I figure, a master that doesn't push enough like you said or a slave that needs to be shimmed, but with all the s truck clutch disengagement issues I have run across or heard of I'm leaning toward the master. Al and I discussed running some numbers comparing to the other cars that use this slave. I'm 6000 miles in on this clutch and it hasn't gotten better. Matter of fact it got worse from the beginning and settled in where it is now, which is why I was thinking it was a bleeding issue.
My experience with a t56 swapped blazer is also a firm clutch pedal and a 2nd gear that grinds more with time. On mine i had to cut out the firewall for the stock s10 master, since it was also an auto to manual swap. Im interested in running the numbers on the clutch system to see how much force, pressure, throw we're expecting.
2nd seems to be the most unhappy, but I get 1st and 3rd problems too. Anything 4th or above has shown no signs of an issue yet.
hmmm 6k miles should have worn down any high spots for sure. I'm curious on the fluid volume displacement compared to other cars too. the blazer definitely has the heaviest stock clutch pedal in any cars ive ever driven, which backs up the theory that there wasn't enough pedal stroke room to the floor/firewall to start with.
Al and I did some clutch Master Cylinder comparisons. Didn't worry about the rest of the system as it is identical to the T56 Camaro including the clutch on my truck. S10 Master has 18mm bore with 35.9mm stroke. Camaro is 19/36, so the S10 doesn't push as much volume as the Camaro. The internet says the 7/8" bore aftermarket slaves are popular; 19mm is essentially 3/4", but have to find another solution for the clutch start and cruise switches on the factory master. Any other GM masters that fit the square hole are the same part number as the S10. Al did some internet sleuthing and looks like a 94-97 Ram may have a square attachment hole too with a larger bore, so hopefully I can find the right combo in the yard to test fit.Another thought floated was to extend the master push rod. Both Al and I are shoving the pedal all the way to the floor to catch the start switch on our respective T56 swaps. It's so far down both of us ditched floor mats independently, so it might be a matter of not enough travel available for the pedal. Or it's just another result of the smaller volume available.We didn't jump into the slave cylinder side of the equation. The internal style slave uses a hollow tube of fluid instead of a solid cylinder like a push rod style, so it's not as easy to find dimensions for. I have an extra slave on the shelf and might have one in the scrap bin too that I will try and get measurements for. I know that the Gen 1 CTS V owners often uses later slave cylinders on clutch/flywheel swaps (C6 vette slaves for example), so there might be something bolt in out there for the slave side of the equation.
how about moving the clutch MC pushrod pivot on the clutch pedal down a touch? i don't know where in the misalignment the pushrod is sitting stock, but maybe moving it down 1/4" would be enough to get you more stroke and possibly retain the start safety switch? (this is assuming the pedal touching carpet/mat/floor is the stroke limitation and not the MC bottoming. I cut away my mat and my carpet is worn pretty much all the way through under the clutch pedal which makes me think the MC may not be getting full stroke.interesting to hear the gen1V owners use something different for the slave.I know the ls1/6 vs the ls2/3 have different flywheel/clutch geometries so i wonder if they changed the PP spring rates and stroke required too.I never had an issue on the rx7 running the ls2/3/7 style clutch/flywheel with the ls1 t56 slave, but then again i was running a totally different MC/pedal setup too.
Isn't moving the pivot point up what we want? Goal would be to move the pedal further from the floor/firewall to gain more clearance for more stroke. Sounds like you're in the same boat as both Al and I with the clutch to the floor.I keep reading about shims or shimming slave cylinders, different torque values for pressure plates affecting where the spring fingers are located, as well as some sort of difference between the C6 slave cylinder and earlier applications with the T56.https://ls1tech.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-2004-2007-gen-i/1642218-cts-v-ls7-clutch-upgrade-how-confused-read.htmlThis thread has a bunch of info for the LS7 clutch into a gen1V that may or may not be related or helpful. I'm definitely curious what the dimensional differences are between the 2 slaves and if it may be another solution path. The fact that the 2 options for the V are the earlier slave + spacer vs C6 slave makes me think the C6 is longer or has more travel or something along those lines.
moving the pedal pivot point upward (longer pedal) would also work, but i was originally saying moving the pushrod point on the pedal lower. (longer pushrod stroke per pedal face stroke)I did all the reading and measuring on the shimming of slaves (nv3500, stock setup) and i was definitely in the correct spot. I'd be hesitant to shim it because you might lose out on full clamp force if you go too far.
No, I wasn't talking about the pedal pivot, but I was also wrong in my thinking in my last post.Moving the master pushrod down on the pedal shortens the pedal stroke for the same master stroke. I think we're on the same page there, now. Drawback will be more force required to move the pedal.There's a ton of information and probably misinformation to sort through in that thread. To start out with I want to get the pedal out of carpet at full stroke and play with the pedal ratio, master size and/or slave size from there. I'm with you on the shimming, at least on the T56 I'm setup exactly as the LS1 Camaro would have been from the factory using all factory or factory replacement parts.I need to sit in the truck and actuate the pedal again as well as look under the dash. I keep thinking I'd prefer lengthening the pushrod or the more attractive option of moving the pushrod mounting point on the pedal forward in vehicle. I've got a bracket design in my head that seems pretty simple to do without chopping up the pedal and could even add in extra holes to adjust the point up/down for pedal feel/travel preference. It would however bring the pedal position toward the driver and I'm not sure how that would feel in real world driving.
math is stupid.
With the slave installed correctly does the clutch assembly mechanically prevent overtravel?Clutch start switch will be calibrateable based on the spacer between switch and master cyl that you mentioned.The larger master came with pushrod uninstalled. Any progress on seeing if the s10 pushrod comes out and can be xfered over?Edit: excellent summary post to start the thread. I dont think ive ever seen as many blockquotes used in a single post anywhere before.
i think the s10 pushrod once you install it into the clip in the MC it's pretty much stuck there forever.it's been a while since i drove the blazer but i feel like i remember wanting the initial 'rest' position lower.obviously with the stock bore MC that wasn't an option.maybe you can get lucky and it will be in a "sweet spot" as-is?on the rx7 i used a 7/8 bore MC on the wilwood pedal setup and it felt great, definitely on the heavier end, even with just the ls7 clutch though.