When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There's some great info in this thread -->here<---, but hoping for more options/answers:
2006 TL 6mt, clutch finally caved at 12 years and 128k miles.
I can get the OEM Luk clutch set and the OEM dualmass Luk flywheel for about $600 (or less), and it would be 'fine' but still drive like someone shot up my left foot with novacaine.
I'd REALLY like to have the AASCO flywheel. I also would think there's a host of sprung clutches that would fit in the J32 transmission with the AASCO flywheel, but still confused on whether or not there's an OEM disc out there (possibly the Aisin Legend disc, as I read in the aforementioned thread?) that would inexpensive enough to make sense to me over just dealing with the factory setup. I noticed Endless RPM has the CX250 kit with billet LW flywheel for $1000 currently-- and so that's probably worth $400 more than OEM setup.
With either setup, what else do I need? pilot bearing? main rear seal plate? (not sure what that is, or if it differs from a $5 'main output shaft seal' listed on Rockauto.com)? or the Input shaft seal (also listed on Rockauto's site)?
Also, I have the UR Crank pulley. I found this on the Accord forum (V6 with MT), where they were mentioning a list of different setup options: OEM Pressure Plate, OEM Friction Disc w/ AASCO 103212-11 Aluminum Flywheel:
Very Similar to the setup mentioned above, holding the same amount of power. Once again, the AASCO flywheel for either the Acura '04-'06 TL, '03 CL, and Honda accord 3.0 V6 (all the same part number) can be used in conjuction with Acura or Honda's OEM pressure plate. This setup will typically run you anywhere from $800 to $890 *You may not use the UR Crank Pulley in combination with this setup
1) can you really not combine the UR lightweight pulley with the LW flywheel? My pulley is not an underdrive, just billet aluminum standard size.
2) can you really run the OEM PP and OEM Luk disc with a single mass flywheel and NOT experience harsh characteristic problems? Has anyone on AZ run with this setup?
What do you hope to gain from changing out the factory style clutch system?
He's not gaining anything! Look closely at those brands other than LUK. Most are LUK components repackaged for more money. This is something that goes on in the auto parts industry more than you might think. Excedy is one of them! Go to rockauto, lookup the Flywheel for this car, look closely at the AMS flywheel picture and zero in on the little label on it near the top. You'll see the LUK#, DMF062, FOR $90 MORE!
And I wouldn't use anything other than a dual-mass flywheel, that's what the car and clutch are designed for.
I think you may need to stop driving your clutch so hard, my 2¢
I THINK OP want to go with single mass because its cheaper and easier to resurface, however the TL design with dual mass to damp the clutch engagement. If you use grabby clutch and fly wheel combo for racing purpose then your motor mounts and transmission will be paying for it later. Keep In mine the clamping force will also change on the crank shaft if you decide to go with semi-racing setup.
been running the aasco/clutchmasters aluminum flywheel and stage 3 clutch with UR stock diameter crank pulley for years on my j32a2 6speed. good way to drop 20+ pounds. About 15 for the flywheel and almost 7 for the crank pulley. So far on my J35A8 everything but the slave is stock.
been running the aasco/clutchmasters aluminum flywheel and stage 3 clutch with UR stock diameter crank pulley for years on my j32a2 6speed. good way to drop 20+ pounds. About 15 for the flywheel and almost 7 for the crank pulley. So far on my J35A8 everything but the slave is stock.
What do you hope to gain from changing out the factory style clutch system?
1) comparably priced parts that perform comparably or better, or may offer additional benefits like weight redux, improved clamping force (although probably not necessary, at least it's a benefit-- basically, all the advantages of more options on the market.
2) a serviceable flywheel.
3) better driving 'feel'.
Hmmm, I'm thinking the cost issue isn't; the LuK parts are pretty reasonably priced compared to pretty much any alternative. Weight reduction in clutch hardware is a double edged sword given the engine's reliance on the flywheel between power strokes. For racing applications it is a no-brainer; for street work, I'd rather have a heavier flywheel. Better driving feel? What would be better about a single mass flywheel?
And I wouldn't use anything other than a dual-mass flywheel, that's what the car and clutch are designed for.
I think you may need to stop driving your clutch so hard, my 2¢
.
Well, all of us here who actually follow and contribute to an Acura forum rather than just taking our car into the dealership everytime the little yellow light turns on, need to be careful not to do anything to modify the car, as that's 'not what the car is designed for'. You'd be perfect as a service advisor at your local Acura dealership. Just something to consider!
A clutch wearing out at 125k miles, especially as the 2nd owner of the vehicle, doesn't seem to warrant a judgment of how I drive the car, maybe that's just me...
Well, all of us here who actually follow and contribute to an Acura forum rather than just taking our car into the dealership everytime the little yellow light turns on, need to be careful not to do anything to modify the car, as that's 'not what the car is designed for'. You'd be perfect as a service advisor at your local Acura dealership. Just something to consider!
A clutch wearing out at 125k miles, especially as the 2nd owner of the vehicle, doesn't seem to warrant a judgment of how I drive the car, maybe that's just me...
You've jumped to a very unsound and poorly thought out conclusion. Your bad.
Hmmm, I'm thinking the cost issue isn't; the LuK parts are pretty reasonably priced compared to pretty much any alternative. Weight reduction in clutch hardware is a double edged sword given the engine's reliance on the flywheel between power strokes. For racing applications it is a no-brainer; for street work, I'd rather have a heavier flywheel. Better driving feel? What would be better about a single mass flywheel?
there is a reason why Honda use dual mass wheel from the beginning lol. You are right about the trade off, however the TL MT isn't 100% bullet proof let say "like" MK4 Supra 6spd, when people launch (especially with sticky tires) it put tremendous stress on the motor mounts, axle and transmission or clutch. Either one of these components will give out depend on how the owner upgrade "mods"
Well, all of us here who actually follow and contribute to an Acura forum rather than just taking our car into the dealership everytime the little yellow light turns on, need to be careful not to do anything to modify the car, as that's 'not what the car is designed for'. You'd be perfect as a service advisor at your local Acura dealership. Just something to consider!
A clutch wearing out at 125k miles, especially as the 2nd owner of the vehicle, doesn't seem to warrant a judgment of how I drive the car, maybe that's just me...
Originally Posted by horseshoez
You've jumped to a very unsound and poorly thought out conclusion. Your bad.
guys guys.....haha
No need to take things personally on the internet here. Everyone is right now calm down.
Hmmm, I'm thinking the cost issue isn't; the LuK parts are pretty reasonably priced compared to pretty much any alternative. Weight reduction in clutch hardware is a double edged sword given the engine's reliance on the flywheel between power strokes. For racing applications it is a no-brainer; for street work, I'd rather have a heavier flywheel. Better driving feel? What would be better about a single mass flywheel?
Assuming you are asking about the benefits of a lighter flywheel and not just the removal of the dual mass function itself then yes the driving feel is much better plus you have more midrange power where an impact on a reduction of the moment of inertia is most felt. At least that's how it showed up on my dynos. Blipping the throttle and rev matching are all easier. Depending on if you get the lightweight crank pulley too and a more difficult clutch hills can be trickier. Have two 6spds now one modded the other stock. Some downsides I feel as if the highway fuel economy drops with lighter components.
Just wanted to offer an engineers perspective and hopefully extinguish some speculation...
A dual-mass flywheel is used to reduce the shock to the powertrain. This type of design is very common with heavy duty (truck) applications.
Honda chose this design to minimize breaking trans internal parts. Something to remember about all vehicle manufacturers is that a design
has to meet several criteria: robustness, NVH, cost. Another thing to consider is that design engineers have to assume that at least some
customers will abuse the car and potentially cause an expensive warranty claim.
The clutch slave cylinder with delay valve is also a design that is intended to reduce the shock to the powertrain. Again, this is common with
heavy duty applications.
The CMC with damper is a design intended to improve NVH.
All the above designs have performance trade-offs.
A dual-mass flywheel is very heavy and reduces the dynamic response desired with spirited driving.
A slave cylinder delay valve substantially reduces the dynamic response. It also reduces clutch disc life because it causes more slippage than is necessary.
A damped CMC also reduces the dynamic response. It also becomes a problem when upgrading the clutch due it's narrow design scope (it's designed for a narrow range of line pressure).
^^^ I had the same conversation with my highly mechanic in 3g TL, he said the MT can take up to 400 WHP but its the shock from launching is what killing it the TL-S makes pretty good Torque despite being FWD. Honda decide to put damper on the clutch by using combination as you describe above to avoid a expensive MT replacement, beside the clutch is consider wear and tear item anyway. Labor wise the clutch call for 10 -12 hours which can be very costly even for indi shop.
So if I spend extra money on a MT TL-S and can't drive it like a semi "sport" sedan? he agree. Well then at this stage I mind as well save up for a F car and it also one major reason why I gave up on looking for a TL-S MT.
The point I was trying to make regarding the torque reversals of the engine. Low RPM clutch engagement will be trickier with lighter flywheels.
To each their own I guess if you go overboard then there can be a big difference. It will just come down to what you are willing to compromise. As long as your taking weight back down to levels from back in the single mass flywheel days then you'll be ok. I took over 20lbs off and felt it. Now I have a full face stage 3 clutch kit that is much more daily drive able then my previous 6 puck,
Originally Posted by Euro-R_Spec_TSX
Just wanted to offer an engineers perspective and hopefully extinguish some speculation...
A dual-mass flywheel is used to reduce the shock to the powertrain. This type of design is very common with heavy duty (truck) applications.
Honda chose this design to minimize breaking trans internal parts. Something to remember about all vehicle manufacturers is that a design
has to meet several criteria: robustness, NVH, cost. Another thing to consider is that design engineers have to assume that at least some
customers will abuse the car and potentially cause an expensive warranty claim.
The clutch slave cylinder with delay valve is also a design that is intended to reduce the shock to the powertrain. Again, this is common with
heavy duty applications.
The CMC with damper is a design intended to improve NVH.
All the above designs have performance trade-offs.
A dual-mass flywheel is very heavy and reduces the dynamic response desired with spirited driving.
A slave cylinder delay valve substantially reduces the dynamic response. It also reduces clutch disc life because it causes more slippage than is necessary.
A damped CMC also reduces the dynamic response. It also becomes a problem when upgrading the clutch due it's narrow design scope (it's designed for a narrow range of line pressure).
Yup pretty much! I wouldn't mind the clutch fluid restrictions nearly as much if they were not felt during normal driving. That fact that you can daily your car with those restrictions removed like cars used to be all the time and notice a substantial difference in clutch pedal feel and response is what I think warrants their removal. Manuals are a dying breed but I find it comical to think they could have taken these NVH concerns to the point where they could have vibration absorbing shift knobs or something haha
My other issue is when engineers start to make these other components lighter and less robust banking on these restrictions that have put in place to protect the now weaker and more efficient parts. What was that old saying the best race car falls apart right when it crosses the finish line?
If you guys are in So Cal come down and drive my different car setups =)
Did the civic clutch master cylinder swap with a steel braided line. No more stiff clutch pedal from trying to rev it high. Car can finally be raced again haha.
I know this thread is old at this point but I was hoping someone could help me out with my clutch, pressure plate, flywheel selection. There is a lot of information out there on AZ and it's daunting.
I'll start with my car: 2007 TL-S 6MT w/130K+ miles. I bought it with 99k. Cold air intake and cat back were on there when I got it. I bought the J pipe and high flow cats but haven't put them on yet. The car lost 3rd and 4th gear. It's at the transmission shop to be rebuilt now (cheaper than buying a new trans.) I don't like the way the clutch grabs. It's very stiff and snappy. Terrible for daily driving. I want to replace it while the trans is out. I have no idea what is in there, but I would like a single mass flywheel for reduced weight. I don't need anything that will handle a ton of power. Definitely under 400, probably under 350. I know I need to get a sprung clutch disc with a single mass. I've been looking at the Aasco flywheel, Clutchmaster clutch kits, Spec clutch kits and flywheels, XLR8 clutch kits... I don't know which way to go. I'm just looking for some help and guidance.
I also need to replace my slave cylinder. My clutch sticks bad at high RPMs. I have read about the check valve and how it can be deleted. Any opinions or guidance on that would be very appreciated.
I know this thread is old at this point but I was hoping someone could help me out with my clutch, pressure plate, flywheel selection. There is a lot of information out there on AZ and it's daunting.
...
Any opinions or guidance on that would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advance for any help!
I've heard a number of complaints about spec clutches not holding up to power levels advertised.
Fwiw, I had the clutchmasters stage 1 on my type s. Didn't go for single mass as it was a daily driver with minor bolts ons. Fixed the sticky clutch pedal that used to occur with the stock clutch.
Some complain about CM as well. But, i've had no issues with the stage 1 on two j series cars using the dual mass fw.
I also need to replace my slave cylinder. My clutch sticks bad at high RPMs. I have read about the check valve and how it can be deleted. Any opinions or guidance on that would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advance for any help!
Clutch sticking is most likely caused by a bad CMC (clutch master cylinder). Some people replace it with a non-damped version, as seen above, but I recommend replacing it with a new OEM part.
Bleed the fluid thoroughly and make sure to replace the fluid every few years. I suspect that extended periods between fluid changes may contribute to the problem, which is somewhat common with TLs.
I picked up a clutch from Eric as well for my Type-S. Better drivability (and I'm sure more reliable) than stock as there's no self adjustment mechanism. Also much better than other aftermarket options. Would highly recommend.
