Clutch: More plates more life?
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: san diego/Rowland Heights
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clutch: More plates more life?
Just wondering, let's say for a stock Z, will a twin plate clutch outlast a single plate? or do they last the same and only the clamping force is different?
Also, are twin plate clutches easier to drive than single plate clutches? I've talked to carbonetics/ ATS today and the Japanese tech told me that metallic multiplate clutches are super difficult to drive whereas single and multiplate carbon clutches are almost the same.
I tend to notice that single clutches seem to require more pedal effort? assuming pedal effort is proportional to clamping force.
ATS offers 1300kg & 1600kg for the single plate. 1100 and 1350 for twin plate...
Also, are twin plate clutches easier to drive than single plate clutches? I've talked to carbonetics/ ATS today and the Japanese tech told me that metallic multiplate clutches are super difficult to drive whereas single and multiplate carbon clutches are almost the same.
I tend to notice that single clutches seem to require more pedal effort? assuming pedal effort is proportional to clamping force.
ATS offers 1300kg & 1600kg for the single plate. 1100 and 1350 for twin plate...
#2
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (564)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 19,266
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
No one can tell you how long a clutch will last...it is 100% driver dependantm, and subjective to what conditions the car sees (torque, terms of use, etc)
pedal effort and clamp force are directly related. The harder the pressure plate exerts force on the disk(s) the more effort the clutch needs from your left foot.
As for difficult to drive, again very subjective. It all comes down to clutch design, not so much disk material. With respect to noise however, carbons tend to generally be quiter than cerametallics
pedal effort and clamp force are directly related. The harder the pressure plate exerts force on the disk(s) the more effort the clutch needs from your left foot.
As for difficult to drive, again very subjective. It all comes down to clutch design, not so much disk material. With respect to noise however, carbons tend to generally be quiter than cerametallics
#5
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Z1 Performance
single plates are for the among us..the twins are only needed on the FI cars
#6
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (564)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 19,266
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Nope - thats like saying the twin is easier to drive vs stock
Any twin, or triple, or single with integrated flywheel, by their nature, have small diameter disks. These clutches are far grabbier than any stock or stock replacement type clutch. By stock replacement I mean those that do not have integrated flywheels.
The mere fact that you have multiple disks means you can have good torque holding capacity, with a light pedal effort...however these clutches are FAR grabbier than stock, making it ultimately trickier to drive.
None of the conventionally used singles on this car (ACT, JWT, RPS) have particularly stiff pedals...and all engage very similar to stock. They grab better, but are not "grabby" if that makes sense.
Any twin, regardless of who makes it, requires overall more attention to operate smoothly vs a stock type clutch. That's not to say they are hard to drive, but they are a bit trickier. The more disks you have, the more overall torque you can hold, the smoother of an engagement they tend to have (from a dead stop) and the noisier things become
Any twin, or triple, or single with integrated flywheel, by their nature, have small diameter disks. These clutches are far grabbier than any stock or stock replacement type clutch. By stock replacement I mean those that do not have integrated flywheels.
The mere fact that you have multiple disks means you can have good torque holding capacity, with a light pedal effort...however these clutches are FAR grabbier than stock, making it ultimately trickier to drive.
None of the conventionally used singles on this car (ACT, JWT, RPS) have particularly stiff pedals...and all engage very similar to stock. They grab better, but are not "grabby" if that makes sense.
Any twin, regardless of who makes it, requires overall more attention to operate smoothly vs a stock type clutch. That's not to say they are hard to drive, but they are a bit trickier. The more disks you have, the more overall torque you can hold, the smoother of an engagement they tend to have (from a dead stop) and the noisier things become
Last edited by Z1 Performance; 04-18-2007 at 01:40 PM.
#7
New Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Get out my way pimpin, VA
Posts: 22,913
Received 2,448 Likes
on
1,769 Posts
The multi-plate discs would be overkill unless you're planning on going F/I. Why spend that much money when a single will fit the bill perfectly? The thing with clutches is that you want one that is gonna be in the range of torque you're dealing with. So say you plan on pushing 300 ft-lbs (flywheel) at the max... you're not gonna need a clutch capable of supporting 1000 ft-lbs. A clutch with a max rating of 300ft-lbs to 400ft-lbs is all you need.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Well I have an ORC 409 D single clutch (damper, hi-mu, quiet) w/ integrated flywheel and an OS Giken STR series Twin clutch setup and their clamping force is very similar. You are saying that the STR will be harder to drive simply b/c it is a dual clutch system, w/out looking to the materials or general design of the integrated design?
Last edited by jonnylaw; 04-18-2007 at 01:47 PM.
#9
New Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Get out my way pimpin, VA
Posts: 22,913
Received 2,448 Likes
on
1,769 Posts
Originally Posted by jonnylaw
Well I have an ORC 409 D single clutch (damper, hi-mu, quiet) w/ integrated flywheel and an OS Giken STR series Twin clutch setup and their clamping force is very similar. You are saying that the STR will be harder to drive simply b/c it is a dual clutch system, w/out looking to the materials or general design of the integrated design?
#11
New Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Get out my way pimpin, VA
Posts: 22,913
Received 2,448 Likes
on
1,769 Posts
In my experience, they're grabby as hell. They take a certain finesse to operate smoothly. I don't think any multi-disc is gonna be smoother than a stock-type clutch.
#12
Shift_Dorifto
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Plano/Frisco, TX
Posts: 3,375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My tilton has two discs and oh boy that thing is like a day care...requires lots of attention and don't even think about relaxing...it keeps you on your toes...but i love it to death and i want another one.
#13
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by bboypuertoroc
In my experience, they're grabby as hell. They take a certain finesse to operate smoothly. I don't think any multi-disc is gonna be smoother than a stock-type clutch.
#14
New Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Get out my way pimpin, VA
Posts: 22,913
Received 2,448 Likes
on
1,769 Posts
^ Yup.
#17
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: san diego/Rowland Heights
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know there are 2 types of carbon.
One is the Carbon on Carbon which i think tilton uses.
The other is the one ATS uses which is the carbon/metal composite.
and ATS does not require it to be warmed up I think at least that's what I read from their website.
One is the Carbon on Carbon which i think tilton uses.
The other is the one ATS uses which is the carbon/metal composite.
and ATS does not require it to be warmed up I think at least that's what I read from their website.
#18
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: san diego/Rowland Heights
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Z1 Performance
Nope - thats like saying the twin is easier to drive vs stock
Any twin, or triple, or single with integrated flywheel, by their nature, have small diameter disks. These clutches are far grabbier than any stock or stock replacement type clutch. By stock replacement I mean those that do not have integrated flywheels.
The mere fact that you have multiple disks means you can have good torque holding capacity, with a light pedal effort...however these clutches are FAR grabbier than stock, making it ultimately trickier to drive.
None of the conventionally used singles on this car (ACT, JWT, RPS) have particularly stiff pedals...and all engage very similar to stock. They grab better, but are not "grabby" if that makes sense.
Any twin, regardless of who makes it, requires overall more attention to operate smoothly vs a stock type clutch. That's not to say they are hard to drive, but they are a bit trickier. The more disks you have, the more overall torque you can hold, the smoother of an engagement they tend to have (from a dead stop) and the noisier things become
Any twin, or triple, or single with integrated flywheel, by their nature, have small diameter disks. These clutches are far grabbier than any stock or stock replacement type clutch. By stock replacement I mean those that do not have integrated flywheels.
The mere fact that you have multiple disks means you can have good torque holding capacity, with a light pedal effort...however these clutches are FAR grabbier than stock, making it ultimately trickier to drive.
None of the conventionally used singles on this car (ACT, JWT, RPS) have particularly stiff pedals...and all engage very similar to stock. They grab better, but are not "grabby" if that makes sense.
Any twin, regardless of who makes it, requires overall more attention to operate smoothly vs a stock type clutch. That's not to say they are hard to drive, but they are a bit trickier. The more disks you have, the more overall torque you can hold, the smoother of an engagement they tend to have (from a dead stop) and the noisier things become
Pardon my ignorance but the only difficulty I'm having with driving different clutches is the engagement from a dead stop. If the engagement is smoother from a dead stop for the twins, why is it more tricky than a single with other variables held constant(same material, flywheel weight etc)?
#19
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (564)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 19,266
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Originally Posted by jonnylaw
Well I have an ORC 409 D single clutch (damper, hi-mu, quiet) w/ integrated flywheel and an OS Giken STR series Twin clutch setup and their clamping force is very similar. You are saying that the STR will be harder to drive simply b/c it is a dual clutch system, w/out looking to the materials or general design of the integrated design?
#20
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (564)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 19,266
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
Originally Posted by Cloud
I don't really understand what you mean by twin plates being more tricky to drive and that they have a smoother engagement from a dead stop.
Pardon my ignorance but the only difficulty I'm having with driving different clutches is the engagement from a dead stop. If the engagement is smoother from a dead stop for the twins, why is it more tricky than a single with other variables held constant(same material, flywheel weight etc)?
Pardon my ignorance but the only difficulty I'm having with driving different clutches is the engagement from a dead stop. If the engagement is smoother from a dead stop for the twins, why is it more tricky than a single with other variables held constant(same material, flywheel weight etc)?