Clutch Lower Push Rod Alignment & AIM?

[Hans L]

I've been attempting to assembly the Clutch Bell Crank and Lower Clutch Push Rod.  If I follow the AIM, it appears there is a major mis-alignment with the lower push rod and the clutch fork.  If I flip the push rod to the other side of the bell crank arm, it appears to align well.

What is correct?   Do I have some underlying alignment issue with the Bell Crank & Clutch Fork?   

Here's the situation:

AIM Diagram for reference:




Lower Clutch Rod, installed per the AIM:  Note big alignment gap:




If I install the push rod on the other side of the arm, (opposite side of what the AIM suggests), it appears to align just fine.  What is correct??

[Mike S]

 Are you sure you have the correct Z-bar?

Mike

[Hans L]

Are you sure you have the correct Z-bar?

Mike

Not sure.  I assumed it's correct, but not sure.   How can I verify it's correct?   

[Mike S]

 This may help: http://www.camaros.net/forums/showthread.php?t=255969

Mike

[Hans L]

Thanks Mike.  I'll measure the tube length tonight and see which version I might have.   

[Hans L]

The clutch bell crank measured at 9 inches, so most likely correct  SB version.  Anyone else experience this issue?  I'm guessing it won't matter, but just puzzling why it's opposite of AIM  diagram.

[JKZ27]

Just looked at mine on the 68. Its installed like the AIM and it contacts the fork at an angle. Not sure if its right but its been working hard for 5 years. I can't remember why I didn't install it from the other side (straight). I'll check my original 69 later to see if its the same.

[Hans L]

Just looked at mine on the 68. Its installed like the AIM and it contacts the fork at an angle. Not sure if its right but its been working hard for 5 years. I can't remember why I didn't install it from the other side (straight). I'll check my original 69 later to see if its the same.

Thanks.  I can force it to fit if installed per the AIM, just seems really weird.  Curious how your '69 is set-up.

[rszmjt]

AIM is wrong IMO. I have been putting them from the inside for 40 yrs. My 69 Z28 has been installed opposite to aim since I bought the car in 74.

[JKZ27]

My original 69 is like the AIM. It contacts the fork at a slight angle.

[Hans L]

My original 69 is like the AIM. It contacts the fork at a slight angle.

Thanks for verifying.  Either way appears to work, just seems odd to have rod at angle the could increase the stress loading of the rod, especially around the connection point to the bell crank.   I installed per the AIM, and I'd guess about a 15-20% angle is present.

I'll probably install it wrong and go with what rszmjt has done....

[rszmjt]

What I don't like is if you install as per AIM, it trys to push the fork off the bellhousing ball, and it wears out the fork clip. JMO again.

[ko-lek-tor]

What I don't like is if you install as per AIM, it trys to push the fork off the bellhousing ball, and it wears out the fork clip. JMO again.

I agree. I don't care what AIM shows, if it works better the other way, that is how I would put it. It is just practicle engineering that would have a straight line positioning.

[Mike S]

 Just to show how the AIM has errors, it even shows the R/S grill center lower molding to valance rivets inserted in the opposite direction from what was actually done.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were other errors.

Mike

[Hans L]

For reference, here's how it appears installed per the AIM:




Also, as a side note, I still need to touch up the bell housing bolts - they should be painted orange.