While waiting for parts for the touring, I dug into the 1915 runabout to find out why it was stuck in direct drive.
The trouble was in the brake drum, clutch drum, washers, and first clutch disk.
Apparently the washers made too much space between the two drums, allowing the disk to get jammed between them.
So I'll have to find an uninjured clutch drum and first disk, and make sure the thrust washers don't provide too much space.
Wonderful news that it wasn't catastrophic !
Yep, I was imagining something broken loose and jammed in the triple gears, so this is a relief.
I'm glad you caught a break! I usually don't have such luck.
Steve- that appears to be an early brake drum and I'm you need the early one for that brake drum. I'm not at the shop, but either the early or late hub has the Ford script on it and that's how to identify the difference. Perhaps someone else will chime in.
I'm pretty sure I have both early and late clutch drums. The question will be how to ID which is which.
When you speak of the "first" disk are you referring to the thick distance plate PN 3330?
How many of the washers did you use to replace the flange of the original "top hat" bushing?
Bill, yes. The thick one (.125"). I don't see it listed in the 1928 parts book or in Lang's catalogue, so I gather it's not in later transmissions. There are three washers (.042" + .043" + .033" = .118") The transmission book says they should add up to .110", so apparently the extra .008" was what got those tabs jammed between the drums.
Steve, I might be missing something, but I think the first clutch plate is the one which engages the lugs on the outside. The one you show with the internal engagement lugs is the second plate in the stack. The complete stack ends with another plate with the outside notches.
If they are installed this way, the second plate will not get caught behind the drum.
Hope this helps.
Allan from down under.
I believe Alan has a point. Wrong plate at the end.
Steve had it right, veteran T's had that plate with inside notches first, actually it is more a spacer plate being .125" thick and called a distance plate, then the stack was fitted as normal.
I also don't understand how the thrust washers are an issue here? If the endfloat is too great caused by a lack of washers the complete assembly will move rearwards and improve the engagement of the inner toothed plates on the hub and have no bearing on the outer plates. I do understand that the early drums (prior to the steel slippers) ran the risk of dropping below the lugs on the drum and some information I have read said to tack weld two of the outer plates together and drop them in first. That's probably due to the original thicker plate not being available now? Still a bit confusing to me also !!
Alan in Western Australia
I seem to recall that the "early" clutch drums had 6 holes vs. 2 holes.
The distance plate(s) I have are 3 disks joined together. You can see the disks from the side. I don't know if these are original but as I have two of them, I think they are.
To test an early drum in order to see if it needs the distance plate, drop a so-called "large" disk into place in the bare drum and see if it will slide under the lugs. If so, you need the plate.
The plates aren't being reproduced, but I may make some if there's a demand.
The early clutch drum has six holes for a puller, and the later drum has only two holes. Is there any other significant difference?
Steve: The early brake drum used a flanged bushing, and did not use the 3 spacing washers. Since you are not using the flanged bushing (not available) you can use two steel washers (.042) and one special washer that is .025 thick (langs 3320BW). You will still need the a spacer plate .125" thick called a distance plate, then the stack is fitted as usual.
I have the .025 washer on its way from Ohio. Two of the major dealers are out if stock, and I was surprised to find that two others don't even carry it.
RV, considering how many early T's there are, I would think that some folks rebuilding those transmissions would like to have the real spacer rather than spot welding three clutch disks together.
Mine has damage to the tabs on one side, as the second picture shows, but the other side is perfect. It should be OK if I just flip it over.
Your pictures are always so well done!
Frank, if Steve had it right, how did it turn out wrong?
There is no flange on the drum bushing, so he needs the correct washer stack to position the clutch hub on the shaft.
You are correct in calling the thick plate used in early trans a spacer. By first installing one ore two 'large' clutch plates at the beginning of the stack, they will serve the same purpose as the now unobtainable thick spacer plate. That way the first 'small' plate is not likely to be so far forward that it can be jammed off the front of the hub.
Hope this helps,
Allan from own under.
Here's an update. Further inspection showed why the spacer was able to get jammed behind the clutch drum.
There was a path worn in the face if the brake drum. The spacer was riding in it.
Measuring the wear, I set the indicator on 0 on the unworn part of the drum face.
Moving it over to the worn path showed .041" wear.
At this point I had a choice. I could go out to the barn and find a replacement for this otherwise perfectly good drum. But this one is already balanced and has a bushing with very few miles on it. So I decided to fill the space instead.
The worn path is .041" deep and a clutch disk is .042" thick. So I added a disk to the spacer to fill the extra space, with .001" to spare. It's attached with six alternating spot welds—inside, outside, inside, outside, etc.
I installed an undamaged clutch drum, put in the 26 disks, and bolted on the driving plate.
I'm calling .002" runout close enough for gummint work. I'll wire the driving plate bolts, get this thing back in the car, and go for a drive.
Best pic of the elusive "distance plate" that I have seen on the forum. So, you welded a small clutch plate to your distance plate to make it thicker, well done!
I sure hope that six spot welds is enough - if not, you'll find out soon enough.
Bumping this Mr. J.
Two grand is mighty XXX XXXX close! :-)
May I ask? Which way did you place the distance plate with it's new "shim"? Shim up or down and why? IF you have the time/would.
Been looking at this thread the whole time and thought I had a notion in my head but couldn't set it all together upstairs since Sunday.
Shim down. It's a .042" filler in a .041" hole. In effect, that adds .001" to the spacer, which I think is negligible. I didn't check, but I imagine the 26 clutch disks together have at least that much wear. So the washers add up to .109" (.042" + .025" + .042") and the spacer in effect is .126". That makes at least .015" engaged with the clutch drum. I don't see any chance of the spacer getting jammed between the drums again.
interesting Steve, good luck - love your driving photo's looks like good model T country.
Thank you sir.
At one point I figured it should be down. Then couldn't recall the why.