Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Advice on clutch for 71 with a 2.7?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143

    Advice on clutch for 71 with a 2.7?

    Hey all - I'm building a motor for my car. Right now it has a 2.7, basic setup with carbs. Trans is a 911/01. Trans has been rebuilt and has a billet center bearing carrier. I don't launch 1st car. It will get an LSD + reinforced side cover too.

    So I'm curious on clutch. if I understand, these use a 225mm clutch different than the 901. What I want is a clutch that could take an RS spec+ power, but not be heavy, or 'hair trigger'.

    Looking at options to clutch, PP, flywheel, etc.

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Ca.
    Posts
    1,166
    IMO don't use a Sachs sport pressure plate . The '70 , '71 push style release fork and cable are not up for the sport PP .

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Richy View Post
    IMO don't use a Sachs sport pressure plate . The '70 , '71 push style release fork and cable are not up for the sport PP .
    Yeah this is the sort of info i'm curious on, if stock is "OK" or what can I do to ensure I have adequate gripping. The clutch in there now I ease into it, it doesn't slip under load. It did when i first got it and needed adjustment. Which its nearly out of.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    Anyone else?

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    5,557
    The stock 71 clutch is more than capable of handling the power from a 2.7.

    Jim

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Breazeale View Post
    The stock 71 clutch is more than capable of handling the power from a 2.7.

    Jim
    Sufficient for ~250hp(knock on wood)? This will be a pretty hot 2.8 build.

    Thanks

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Ca.
    Posts
    1,166
    What about the transaxle itself ? 250 HP may be too much . A stock '77 2.7 has 160 DIN HP .

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    5,557
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyerx View Post
    Sufficient for ~250hp(knock on wood)? This will be a pretty hot 2.8 build.

    Thanks
    Yes. It's certainly no weaker than a 2.7 clutch.

    Jim

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Richy View Post
    What about the transaxle itself ? 250 HP may be too much . A stock '77 2.7 has 160 DIN HP .
    Well i don’t plan to clutch drop first. Trans is fresh and has billed middle bearing carrier. Will be adding an lsd and billed side plate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Breazeale View Post
    Yes. It's certainly no weaker than a 2.7 clutch.

    Jim
    Ok so suggestion is keep it stockish. I may go with a lighter pp and flywheel setup.

    I don’t want over aggressive clamping force trashing the 71 style fork system but don’t want it slipping either...

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Richy View Post
    What about the transaxle itself ? 250 HP may be too much . A stock '77 2.7 has 160 DIN HP .
    Well i don’t plan to clutch drop first. Trans is fresh and has billet middle bearing carrier. Will be adding an lsd and billed side plate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Breazeale View Post
    Yes. It's certainly no weaker than a 2.7 clutch.

    Jim
    Ok so suggestion is keep it stockish. I may go with a lighter pp and flywheel setup.

    I don’t want over aggressive clamping force trashing the 71 style fork system but don’t want it slipping either...
    Last edited by Spyerx; 09-04-2019 at 08:43 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Message Board Disclaimer and Terms of Use
This is a public forum. Messages posted here can be viewed by the public. The Early 911S Registry is not responsible for messages posted in its online forums, and any message will express the views of the author and not the Early 911S Registry. Use of online forums shall constitute the agreement of the user not to post anything of religious or political content, false and defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise to violate the law and the further agreement of the user to be solely responsible for and hold the Early 911S Registry harmless in the event of any claim based on their message. Any viewer who finds a message objectionable should contact us immediately by email. The Early 911S Registry has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.