HJ45 clutch master w/3B clutch release slave? (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

RufusTheDufus

SILVER Star
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Threads
180
Messages
2,815
Location
Moronville, ME
I'm slowly working on the HJ to BJ process in my Troopy. Getting ready to start running all new hydraulics for brakes and clutch.

Can I use the 1980 HJ45 clutch master for the H diesel engine/clutch with a 1982 3B style clutch slave? Seems like there must have been a change in clutch hydraulics in 1980/81 across the range of drive lines in all Cruiser models. Are they incompatible in terms of volume or slave range of movement?

ToyoDIY.com shows different master part numbers for the two vehicles.
1980 HJ45 master: 31410-60023
1982 BJ42 master 31410-60050.

There was no BJ45 in 1980 but there was a BJ43. BJ43 in that year shows the same clutch master part as the HJ45. The 1982 HJ47 and the 1982 BJ42 appear to use the same clutch master.
 
Hey Rufus as far as I know most B and 3B powered cruisers use the same slave master.The H powered ones seem to be different and when I was living in Latin America it was almost impossible to find a B/3B slave.All the ones they had there had a larger fistance between the 2 mounting bolts.

Here in the us I have bought a few from Cruiserparts.net and later I bought some from the online Toyota parts dealers wich was cheaper(can't remember which one)

If you use the 3B style clutch you will have to dial the little rod further out then with the old B style clutch.
 
I know I need to use the B/3B style slave cylinder that bolts to the bell housing. The thing I'm trying to figure out is if the clutch master that bolts to the firewall (with 3 bolts) and connects to the clutch pedal in a 1980 HJ45 will work with the 1982+ style BJ slave.

It seems like something changed in the late 1980/early 81 model years. Does the early style master move more or less volume than the late style clutch master?
 
I know I need to use the B/3B style slave cylinder that bolts to the bell housing. The thing I'm trying to figure out is if the clutch master that bolts to the firewall (with 3 bolts) and connects to the clutch pedal in a 1980 HJ45 will work with the 1982+ style BJ slave.

It seems like something changed in the late 1980/early 81 model years. Does the early style master move more or less volume than the late style clutch master?

I think you need to compare bore sizes (which are cast into their outside surfaces)...

Here are the bore sizes for a 1979 B-diesel:

Master is 3/4":
ClutchMasterAsco4.jpg


Slave is 7/8""
ClutchSlaveAisin2.jpg


So this here is the pre-Oct1981 BJ clutch setup.

So maybe all you need now is someone to post up the post-Oct1981 bore-sizes?


:beer:
 
When Toyota sells a cylinder, they sell it complete with the rod, adjusting/lock nut(s), clevis and boot etc as applicable (unlike most aftermarket suppliers where you seldom get a pushrod or even a boot).

So I've learnt that a change in the Toyota part number for a "CYLINDER ASSY" can simply be from having a longer pushrod. (ie. There doesn't have to be any change to the cylinder itself.)

I know this because these two clutch masters are both 3/4 bore and both fit my BJ40 perfectly:

Here's my original ASCO-branded clutch master that was then given Toyota Part Number 31410-60023
ClutchMasterAsco.jpg

ClutchMasterAsco1.jpg


When I went for a replacement in December 2000, that wasn't available so Toyota sold me 31410-60041 which is AISIN-branded, and, apart from the branding, is identical except for having a longer pushrod
ClutchMasterAisin2.jpg


By the way... The photo above has a different pushrod in it. (It came with a longer one than this.)

Anyway... Given that your HJ45 master is 3/4, I think it should work with the newer BJ slave if that is still 7/8 bore..

(Pushrod lengths are always something you can play with.)


But let's have a look anyway......

Late model BJ slave is 31470-60110 from what I can see from my info here...

Damn ... Internet searches suggest this one is 15/16" bore!!!!!

Still..... that's only a 1/16th of an inch difference .... A bit less pedal-pressure needed for disengagement and a bit more pedal travel to accomplish it if I'm not mistaken..

Why not give it a go.... That 1/16th of an inch difference should barely be noticeable I reckon

:beer:
 
Last edited:
I'm going to try it. Can't hurt. As long as the pedal height is reasonable I'm not too concerned about pedal travel. I'm 6'3" (190cm) tall. So a tall pedal is problematic for me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom