I have never seen one on a Mustang, but have worked on several cars that had them. Design is critical though and they use an over center style linkage so that the spring is not pulling on the pedal when the pedal is all the way up!

Wouldn't that be ' the-same-as' riding the clutch?! (bad habit of resting your left foot on the clutch pedal)
What about modifying the clutch pedal so less effort is required to depress the pedal? (that's all I got!)
6sally6

A spring has different tension during range of motion which might be complex to calculate or apply! The idea of changing the pedal ratio sounds better IMHO.

BTW Texas is right with the helper spring that acts as a return and helper spring. Stiffen that one might show some benefit to your problem too.

Mustsed
 

Last edited by Mustsed (5/06/2022 11:48 AM)

Consider a smaller diameter piston master cylinder. That will lower the pedal effort.

Mach173 wrote:

MS wrote:

Consider a smaller diameter piston master cylinder. That will lower the pedal effort.

I dont know if a another brand will fit into the malwood kit, and lowering the size will affect the stroke length on hydraulic throw out bearing. 

Not necessarily.  If you changed the pedal ratio and used a smaller bore master with a longer stroke you could move the same fluid volume as the larger bore master in the existing setup.  Its becoming a complicated engineering problem though.  What's got me is where a hydraulic clutch is too heavy.  Everything I've got a hydraulic clutch in (WRX, FJ, and IROC) requires very little effort regardless the clutch I have in the vehicle.  The whole point of hydraulics is they are supposed to be smooth and require minimal effort.  Now, all of those vehicles use a conventional master/slave system.  I've never been a fan of hydraulic throwout bearings.  They are typically used to solve some kind of space or other issue, but there's typically no adjustment.  My cousin and I used one years back when we converted his Wrangler to a SBC and kept the original Peugot 5 speed.  It took us far longer than it should have to get it to where it was acceptable (tough to bleed, etc.). 

MS wrote:

Consider a smaller diameter piston master cylinder. That will lower the pedal effort.

I agree with MS you should be able to modify the hydraulics for an improved pedal.  You will however need to do the math as it is not as simple as just getting a smaller bore master.  If the master cylinder has a smaller bore it will need a longer stroke to have adequate fluid volume to achieve the same actuation at the bellhousing.  Also are you using an external slave cylinder or a hydraulic throwout bearing?  Another issue could be pedal ratio which can have a TON to do with this.  Does the pedal bottom out way before the clutch pedal hits the floor or can you go though most of the pedal stroke.  A properly designed system will maximize pedal stroke to minimize pedal effort, but a lot of designs I have seen don't take this into account and the pedal is a short stroke.
 

TKOPerformance wrote:

Mach173 wrote:

MS wrote:

Consider a smaller diameter piston master cylinder. That will lower the pedal effort.

I dont know if a another brand will fit into the malwood kit, and lowering the size will affect the stroke length on hydraulic throw out bearing. 

Not necessarily.  If you changed the pedal ratio and used a smaller bore master with a longer stroke you could move the same fluid volume as the larger bore master in the existing setup.  Its becoming a complicated engineering problem though.  What's got me is where a hydraulic clutch is too heavy.  Everything I've got a hydraulic clutch in (WRX, FJ, and IROC) requires very little effort regardless the clutch I have in the vehicle.  The whole point of hydraulics is they are supposed to be smooth and require minimal effort.  Now, all of those vehicles use a conventional master/slave system.  I've never been a fan of hydraulic throwout bearings.  They are typically used to solve some kind of space or other issue, but there's typically no adjustment.  My cousin and I used one years back when we converted his Wrangler to a SBC and kept the original Peugot 5 speed.  It took us far longer than it should have to get it to where it was acceptable (tough to bleed, etc.). 

TKO, a lesser pedal ratio combined with a smaller piston would put his leg effort right back in the same level!
Sometimes a little extra stroke might be advisable to difficult leg effort.

Hi
I got in touch with Malwood. They are recommending Our 5/8” x 1-3/8 “ Master cylinder should solve the issue.. I have RAM throw out bearing,   https://ramclutches.com/product/78132/
 

 

Last edited by Mach173 (5/08/2022 11:48 AM)

MS wrote:

TKOPerformance wrote:

Mach173 wrote:

I dont know if a another brand will fit into the malwood kit, and lowering the size will affect the stroke length on hydraulic throw out bearing. 

Not necessarily.  If you changed the pedal ratio and used a smaller bore master with a longer stroke you could move the same fluid volume as the larger bore master in the existing setup.  Its becoming a complicated engineering problem though.  What's got me is where a hydraulic clutch is too heavy.  Everything I've got a hydraulic clutch in (WRX, FJ, and IROC) requires very little effort regardless the clutch I have in the vehicle.  The whole point of hydraulics is they are supposed to be smooth and require minimal effort.  Now, all of those vehicles use a conventional master/slave system.  I've never been a fan of hydraulic throwout bearings.  They are typically used to solve some kind of space or other issue, but there's typically no adjustment.  My cousin and I used one years back when we converted his Wrangler to a SBC and kept the original Peugot 5 speed.  It took us far longer than it should have to get it to where it was acceptable (tough to bleed, etc.). 

TKO, a lesser pedal ratio combined with a smaller piston would put his leg effort right back in the same level!
Sometimes a little extra stroke might be advisable to difficult leg effort.

Possibly, but I didn't say lessen the pedal ratio; I said change it.  I'm thinking there's a sweet spot that can be calculated where the bore size, stroke length, and pedal ratio converge to achieve his desired result.  Sounds like Daze could probably figure out where that point is using math.  The rest of us are pretty much just offering broad stroke suggestions at this point. 

5/8” x 1-3/8”  IS what RAM recommends on the other hand Malwood claims that  We don't think there should be an issue with using our 3/4" master with the set up you have now. You have chosen a heavy duty clutch but even with that, It should be a good fit and work well with the pedal feel being good. Il be back with some progress news I hope soon.

Last edited by Mach173 (5/09/2022 11:25 PM)

A friend who has s similar setup in his Firebird68 tried the clutch last night. It was exactly the sane feeling as is clutch. I am letting this be for now. Thanks for input.

Daze wrote:

Mach173 wrote:

A friend who has s similar setup in his Firebird68 tried the clutch last night. It was exactly the sane feeling as is clutch. I am letting this be for now. Thanks for input.

I think you would be a lot happier with the system if you ditched the hydraulic throw out bearing and went with a slave cylinder.

Maybe true, but I have invested quite an amount of money in this solution. Il keep it for now :-)