Need a Clutch
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: CT
Need a Clutch
hey guys im in need of a clutch on my 92, i need something of a decent price and good quality since im only in highschool with a semi good job, i have a dump body on the truck and i plan on doin some power mods but nothing wild, probably like 300hp would hold up, if u guys could lead me down the right path that would be amazing, thanks
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
I have no complaints about the South Bend -009 I just put in my 12v 2nd gen. It has all of about 20 miles on it, but so far it engages correctly, came with the right parts for throw out bearing and a new pilot bushing and bearing for installing with nv4500 or g360. The price was reasonable, but they will tell you not to tow with it. Mine took a talented mechanic quite a bit of effort and work to get the trans in and out, so it may be worth considering paying somebody. Make sure the flywheel gets surfaced while you have it apart. The stock replacement would be pretty close as well, but a 13" disc may require some machining of the flywheel to make room for a bigger center hub or drilling a larger pattern of holes to mount the pressure plate. That is what I was told when searching for mine.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 783
Likes: 1
From: Oak Lawn, IL
Stock 13 inch sachs clutch. I paid 400-450 2 years ago off ebay. should work fine for what your doing. Do the flywheel. I had southbend clutch reserface mine and put a pilot bearing in and was very happy with the work. I would recommend them. You may want to try them for the stock clutch as they asked where I got mine from and how much and they said they were about the same price.
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 85
I have no complaints about the South Bend -009 I just put in my 12v 2nd gen. It has all of about 20 miles on it, but so far it engages correctly, came with the right parts for throw out bearing and a new pilot bushing and bearing for installing with nv4500 or g360. The price was reasonable, but they will tell you not to tow with it. Mine took a talented mechanic quite a bit of effort and work to get the trans in and out, so it may be worth considering paying somebody. Make sure the flywheel gets surfaced while you have it apart. The stock replacement would be pretty close as well, but a 13" disc may require some machining of the flywheel to make room for a bigger center hub or drilling a larger pattern of holes to mount the pressure plate. That is what I was told when searching for mine.
I disagree with most of the statements of opinion above.
If your flywheel is not grooved and far out of spec do NOT have it surfaced. (they are conical in stock form to prevent engagement chatter.) Machining the surface flat is not advised. Usually if the flywheel is severely out of spec it is better to just replace it with a new one.
The rest about 13" requiring drilling and modification is just lack of baseline knowledge about 1st gens. Lets not add to the vast wealth of uninformed hearsay on teh internet. The 13" Sachs clutch was stock for 1st Gens and no modification needed.
To the OP: Go with a stock 13" sachs unit. It is recommended that you don't slip it/minimize slipping. What is wrong with the stock clutch? These usually outlast the throwout bearings.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 85
"The original Sachs clutch I still think is the best deal going for the first gen trucks... The fleets used to get 3 to 400,000 miles out of them... Even then most of the failures were throw out bearings locking up then melting the fingers on the pressure plate... Hardly the fault of the clutch. Greasing the throw out would have saved most of them.
A year and a half ago I took the original clutch out of my 93 daily driver to inspect it and replace the throw out bearing and the leaking rear main seal.
It had 223,000 miles on it.. I measured the friction material on the disc and found that it was only .006 thinner than the new disc I had.. I just put it back in...
Granted I take care of my truck and do not over load it...I also know how to drive a stick. But most of the miles were city miles which are hard on clutches...
There has never been a clutch ever come out of Detroit in a light vehicle that has had as an outstanding service record as the one that was put in the first gen trucks... Not ever !
The 12" that came in the 94 up trucks was redesigned in 94 because it was obvious that the Sachs 13 was made too well and cost us too much...
There was a service bulletin put out on the change...It said that the new smaller lighter clutch was the "new improved model " to stop clutch chatter problems... It also said that it was to be used in place of the 13" in the early trucks for better performance...
It was all a lie ! The purpose of the redesigned 12" was to save cost and weight... The only thing that really improved was Chryslers profit margin...
The newer 12 " cost 1/3 of what the 13" did.. Interestingly enough the list price never came down in the dealers price list...
One last thing I will mention is that ...When the trucks were first being developed we tried all the clutches that we had used in the gas trucks + a whole lot of others... None of them held up well enough during testing to be used in production... It was decided that a whole new clutch needed to be developed if we were going to get the trucks threw warrantee with out failure.
Chrysler and Sachs engineers both worked for 3 years developing the clutch we used. It was over built due to the fact that we did not know what to expect. As you all know the Cummins engine just does not quit...The clutch is the weak link...We just made sure it was not ... By the 93 model we knew that the clutch was too good.. It had less than 2% failure rate in the first 4 years it was used.... Another thing to note is that the 13" first gen clutch
was never used in any other truck , tractor or machine on the planet except
our 89 to 93 diesel trucks... It's been 14 years since it was last used. I suspect that it will soon be discontinued.... Or in Chrysler lingo....they will be
"NS1" Sadly enough...A term that all the first gen guys are going to be getting well acquainted
with in the future"
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 85
Yes,,,
I spoke with Terry AKA Mysteryman today in fact. He is a cancer survivor... He was at the brink of death a couple years ago but luckily it is in remission at this point in time and he sounds quite well.
That post above I quoted was from 2007 if you did the math.
Lately I've seen 13" cast iron sachs clutches available new which is a good sign. I have one in each of my trucks both the '72 and '93 - I also have a NIB one sitting in my garage just in case for some reason I would need it but it most likely will never be used by me...
I spoke with Terry AKA Mysteryman today in fact. He is a cancer survivor... He was at the brink of death a couple years ago but luckily it is in remission at this point in time and he sounds quite well.
That post above I quoted was from 2007 if you did the math.
Lately I've seen 13" cast iron sachs clutches available new which is a good sign. I have one in each of my trucks both the '72 and '93 - I also have a NIB one sitting in my garage just in case for some reason I would need it but it most likely will never be used by me...
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 101
Likes: 8
From: in AZ but in Bend Oregon now!
hydraulics?
Chrysler wanted to cut costs. During the cummins launch things were overbuilt/over-engineered. They had all the data necessary to econo-engineer the 2nd gens. Read this from our resident Chrysler engineer Mysterman:
"The original Sachs clutch I still think is the best deal going for the first gen trucks... The fleets used to get 3 to 400,000 miles out of them... Even then most of the failures were throw out bearings locking up then melting the fingers on the pressure plate... Hardly the fault of the clutch. Greasing the throw out would have saved most of them.
A year and a half ago I took the original clutch out of my 93 daily driver to inspect it and replace the throw out bearing and the leaking rear main seal.
It had 223,000 miles on it.. I measured the friction material on the disc and found that it was only .006 thinner than the new disc I had.. I just put it back in...
Granted I take care of my truck and do not over load it...I also know how to drive a stick. But most of the miles were city miles which are hard on clutches...
There has never been a clutch ever come out of Detroit in a light vehicle that has had as an outstanding service record as the one that was put in the first gen trucks... Not ever !
The 12" that came in the 94 up trucks was redesigned in 94 because it was obvious that the Sachs 13 was made too well and cost us too much...
There was a service bulletin put out on the change...It said that the new smaller lighter clutch was the "new improved model " to stop clutch chatter problems... It also said that it was to be used in place of the 13" in the early trucks for better performance...
It was all a lie ! The purpose of the redesigned 12" was to save cost and weight... The only thing that really improved was Chryslers profit margin...
The newer 12 " cost 1/3 of what the 13" did.. Interestingly enough the list price never came down in the dealers price list...
One last thing I will mention is that ...When the trucks were first being developed we tried all the clutches that we had used in the gas trucks + a whole lot of others... None of them held up well enough during testing to be used in production... It was decided that a whole new clutch needed to be developed if we were going to get the trucks threw warrantee with out failure.
Chrysler and Sachs engineers both worked for 3 years developing the clutch we used. It was over built due to the fact that we did not know what to expect. As you all know the Cummins engine just does not quit...The clutch is the weak link...We just made sure it was not ... By the 93 model we knew that the clutch was too good.. It had less than 2% failure rate in the first 4 years it was used.... Another thing to note is that the 13" first gen clutch
was never used in any other truck , tractor or machine on the planet except
our 89 to 93 diesel trucks... It's been 14 years since it was last used. I suspect that it will soon be discontinued.... Or in Chrysler lingo....they will be
"NS1" Sadly enough...A term that all the first gen guys are going to be getting well acquainted
with in the future"
"The original Sachs clutch I still think is the best deal going for the first gen trucks... The fleets used to get 3 to 400,000 miles out of them... Even then most of the failures were throw out bearings locking up then melting the fingers on the pressure plate... Hardly the fault of the clutch. Greasing the throw out would have saved most of them.
A year and a half ago I took the original clutch out of my 93 daily driver to inspect it and replace the throw out bearing and the leaking rear main seal.
It had 223,000 miles on it.. I measured the friction material on the disc and found that it was only .006 thinner than the new disc I had.. I just put it back in...
Granted I take care of my truck and do not over load it...I also know how to drive a stick. But most of the miles were city miles which are hard on clutches...
There has never been a clutch ever come out of Detroit in a light vehicle that has had as an outstanding service record as the one that was put in the first gen trucks... Not ever !
The 12" that came in the 94 up trucks was redesigned in 94 because it was obvious that the Sachs 13 was made too well and cost us too much...
There was a service bulletin put out on the change...It said that the new smaller lighter clutch was the "new improved model " to stop clutch chatter problems... It also said that it was to be used in place of the 13" in the early trucks for better performance...
It was all a lie ! The purpose of the redesigned 12" was to save cost and weight... The only thing that really improved was Chryslers profit margin...
The newer 12 " cost 1/3 of what the 13" did.. Interestingly enough the list price never came down in the dealers price list...
One last thing I will mention is that ...When the trucks were first being developed we tried all the clutches that we had used in the gas trucks + a whole lot of others... None of them held up well enough during testing to be used in production... It was decided that a whole new clutch needed to be developed if we were going to get the trucks threw warrantee with out failure.
Chrysler and Sachs engineers both worked for 3 years developing the clutch we used. It was over built due to the fact that we did not know what to expect. As you all know the Cummins engine just does not quit...The clutch is the weak link...We just made sure it was not ... By the 93 model we knew that the clutch was too good.. It had less than 2% failure rate in the first 4 years it was used.... Another thing to note is that the 13" first gen clutch
was never used in any other truck , tractor or machine on the planet except
our 89 to 93 diesel trucks... It's been 14 years since it was last used. I suspect that it will soon be discontinued.... Or in Chrysler lingo....they will be
"NS1" Sadly enough...A term that all the first gen guys are going to be getting well acquainted
with in the future"
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 93
From: Richmond, VA
Federic,
First I would check the fluid reservoir for the clutch hydraulics. However, if that is not empty, I would suggest that you check the end play in your crank. It is possible that the thrust face has fallen off the main bearing shell. This was a common problem in the pre '92 trucks, but might have happened to you. As I recall, I was able to insert a pry bar behind the flywheel through the area covered by the clutch fork boot. I depressed the clutch (to shove the crank forward), then pried it back with the bar . . . it was obviously out of spec in my case.
First I would check the fluid reservoir for the clutch hydraulics. However, if that is not empty, I would suggest that you check the end play in your crank. It is possible that the thrust face has fallen off the main bearing shell. This was a common problem in the pre '92 trucks, but might have happened to you. As I recall, I was able to insert a pry bar behind the flywheel through the area covered by the clutch fork boot. I depressed the clutch (to shove the crank forward), then pried it back with the bar . . . it was obviously out of spec in my case.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,479
Likes: 211
From: Isanti, MN
On clutch longevity, if you are in the habit of slipping the clutch in second to save a shift, you will replace clutches. If you use granny to get things spinning and then shift in a way that engine speed matches before you release the clutch, the clutch will outlive you and everything else.
I ran several 47-53 Chevy trucks. they all came with 10 or 11" clutches that were shot. I replaced them with 9 1/2" car clutches. (130 hp engine) Never wore one out. Wore out several trucks. I always started in granny, and double clutched all shifts, (or didn't use the clutch at all)
My kid who figured you have to do the friction point-throttle thing every shift, took the clutch out of my 93 Honda in about a week.
I ran several 47-53 Chevy trucks. they all came with 10 or 11" clutches that were shot. I replaced them with 9 1/2" car clutches. (130 hp engine) Never wore one out. Wore out several trucks. I always started in granny, and double clutched all shifts, (or didn't use the clutch at all)
My kid who figured you have to do the friction point-throttle thing every shift, took the clutch out of my 93 Honda in about a week.