Tricky-Ricky

Unless your using a true damper, rather than some hard rubber sandwiched between metal in a tube, its not worth the effort, they just transmit a lot of engine vibration into the body, and you will likely feel/hear it.

I found a very interesting piece about this on another forum, complete with calculations. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-73017.html

The above comment's amount to the same thing, however it would not necessarily increase pedal effort, Lets try and simplify this, if the master cylinder has the same volume (as in diameter and travel) as the slave cylinder (pivot/fulcrum angles being equal/aside) then would you not agree that they will both move with the same sweep of movement, IE piston for piston? If you then decrease the size/volume of the slave cylinder and leave the master the same, the slave will respond faster and reach full range before the master has completed its full range, and to save time vice/versa Which is what i said above and you also, And so the scenario of decreasing the size of the slave in relation to the master results in a narrower engagement point, does it not? and if you decrease the master you will then reverse this, however once you start to add different fulcrum angles into the equation things change and become more complicated, What i did was by leaving the cylinder ratio's as there where (whatever they might be) was to change the fulcrum point enough to decrease the pedal effort and widen the engagement window, IE the clutch pedal uses more of it arch of travel to fully disengage the clutch, making for better control. Hopefully this will make sense, meanwhile I'll look for a more graphical illustration.

Guess we will have to disagree then, until i can find a decent explanation of how hydraulic ratios work that is, your last comment actually outlines what i said

Enlarging the slave would result in less movement to the clutch operating leaver for the same movement of the clutch pedal/master cylinder, which would make full disengagement not possible, and would also result in the same effort needed for pedal depression. Whereas decreasing the size of the slave will result in less effort and movement required from the master cylinder and more range of movement from the slave, however this would also not solve the small engage/disengage window. My surmise of the master/slave cylinder mismatch when i think about it, was maybe not the whole answer, i actually now think that the problem actually lies in a large degree with the bad fulcrum point of the pedal, which is why my mod has worked so well.

I'm sure i could of eventually found s suitable master/slave cylinder that may or may not have done the job, but i wanted a quicker fix, as my clutch was starting to annoy me and detract from the driving experience. Actually enlarging the slave cylinder will compound the problem, it would actually need to be smaller, and even then this would not necessarily correct the problem. Just in case anyone is interested, i drove 40 odd miles at the weekend, and the clutch is now an absolute pleasure to use, a bit lighter and so much more controllable, gear changes have gone from a rather numb feel, because of the very short engagement point, which made for a jerky change, with no real hope of a smooth down shift, to really controllable with feel, up shift are just as precise and easy, well worth all the effort. __________________

Kind of depends on what power your aiming at? rods are the VQ weak point and a set of low comp forged pistons are also good, whether you will need more will depend on your BHP goals, i am not sure if the valve material is up to turbo combustion temps? One other thing you will definitely need is a complete fuel return system as the VQ doesn't use one, a decent adjustable fuel regulator as well, how are you planning on coupling one turbo to two headders?

I see your point, mind you if you check out the US guy who is marketing the proprietary "conversion" this device basically does the same thing but with a small adjustment window, however there is no mention of master cylinder rod misalignment, which it will most certainly cause, as there is no addition in his kit to realign, so i guess he figures that its OK .

Is this what you mean? "However i decided that i dint want to live with it, and so i just fabricated a small metal plate drilled with two clearance holes to fit the same size as the master cylinder rod, the holes in my case where drilled again at about 15mm centers, so i have enough clearance for the two adjusting nuts, the pics will explain it better,but you get the gist i hope."

Adjusting the clutch rod alone just changes where in the pedal range of movement the clutch engages/disengages, it doesn't change the engagement window, as for the marking using the clevis, it was just an easy way of distancing the new hole to be drilled, if your uncertain then just space it 15-20mm between centers. Its actually not that hard to remove, you will need to remove the cover and switch connector's under the dash for access, and you need a long extension bar to get at the nuts, but thats about it, 30mins max, The adapter plate is in the second pic, it allows the actuator rod to sit straight, its all in the write up.

Thought some of you guys with manual gear boxes might appreciate this. Disclaimer: if you decide to go ahead with this, ITS AT YOUR OWN RISK! if you don't feel competent then don't bother. I have felt for a long time that my clutch is rather heavy and too quick, as in short engagement window, and lack of feel, which spoils the driving experience, now i have already removed the clutch pedal assist spring, which did nothing but make it even heavier. So with this in mind i went hunting on the US forums and came across a thread that a guy with some engineering experience came up with an idea of how to combat this, but basically altering the leverage/fulcrum point of the pedal, his opinion was as mine is, that the master/slave cylinder combo was mismatched, and didn't work well. Anyway his idea was to fabricate a rather over elaborate method of shifting the fulcrum point further up, and so reducing the effort needed along with increasing the engagement window, which make clutch control a lot easier. Now at first i thought i would be lazy and see if i could order one of his kits, but he only makes them for LHD cars, (i understand there has been a group buy proposed, here, but due to the lack of overall interest, there is little likelihood of him going ahead with the manufacture of a RHD kit for this) so i decided to bite the bullet and pull out my entire clutch pedal and see if i could make a much simpler modification and achieve the same result, and the answer was yes i could with nowhere near the effort that he had gone to. So its just a case of removing the pedal and disassembling, then marking and drilling a hole of the same diameter about 15-20mm higher up from the original clevis pin pivot hole, i actually just used the clevis and held the bottom edge of it flush with the old hole and using the original to make a mark, i then drilled this to the correct dia, so i could refit the plastic/nylon liner back in, thats it for that bit, you could probably put it all back together and live with the slight master cylinder rod misalignment, as it allows for a small amount. However i decided that i dint want to live with it, and so i just fabricated a small metal plate drilled with two clearance holes to fit the same size as the master cylinder rod, the holes in my case where drilled again at about 15mm centers, so i have enough clearance for the two adjusting nuts, the pics will explain it better,but you get the gist i hope. And the result! well i wouldn't go so far as to say that it halves the pedal effort, but i would say it now requires about 35% less effort to depress the pedal, and the other result is to give a much wider engagement/disengagement window, which results in about 60% more feel, so well worth the trouble IMO. Obviously you will need a little mechanical know how for this, but its not rocket science, but i guess you will have to make up your own mind as to whether you fell confident enough to tackle this.

I had already fitted a pair of Alpine amps in place of the std amp, and some decent speakers, which improved the overall sound, i then picked up a top range Alpine head unit for a very good price, so rather than try and bodge up a single din into the factory Bose slot, So i decided to move the DVD/nav unit by elongating the wiring loom, as i wanted to keep the use of the factory screen for my reversing camera and TV, and fit the HU there, a bit of a mission, but the result is neat and works very well, with far better sound quality as a result.

Sorry i know its all a matter of taste, but they look like pram wheels to me, way too much gap.

Out of interest, can you actually use/read the screen when connected to your car PC? i hooked my laptop display up to the screen via a converter and the picture was rubbish.

First off thanks to everybody who has taken the time to comment so far, be interested to hear further comments, I an pretty satisfied that my window reset button works as its supposed to, although i do agree that it doesn't feel much like a button. The way i read the reset guide, and it appeared to work for me, was to wind the window all the way down, using to manual button IE not pull and let go, and once down press and hold the reset button, while using the manual button procedure for closing, then let go the reset, and all should be well. This should all be done with the door closed! However if you have removed the motor or just the armature, and had to unwind the cable drum a little to take the tension off the motor drive, i found that you had to rewind to the same position as removal or you end up with a window gap.