RESOLVED : Help? What's the Proper Clutch Pedal Engagement Point?

[pb4ugo]

The free play is the adjustment that determines were the clutch engages in relation to the pedal height and is adjusted by the threaded rod. It's a top down measurement adjustment & not a where it starts grabing from the bottom, or in your terms "proper pedal height engagement point" from your 1st post. From your pic of the manual it sounds like you want to adjust closer to the 1.6" freeplay adjustment. The more freeplay you have(shorter rod), the lower the pedal height is when it starts to grab.

 

[lostmarbles]

Hmmm.

I thought that page in the FSM is all you need unless you've changed something in your set-up (and made it different from how it was ex-factory).

Maybe my engagement point is high compared to other manual-g/box vehicles? Maybe it isn't?

Every other vehicle I normally drive is an automatic so it's hard for me to tell.

Surely your engagement point is automatically determined by the components in your clutch-system once you've set your pedal height and freeplays correctly.



On my clutch I set my pedal to be 215mm above the floor (without any foot pressure on the clutch of course).

I then set my M/cyl pushrod play and ended up with 4mm (when the spec for me is from 1 to 4). This play ensures my master piston is able to return fully with no rod-pressure being applied to it when my foot is off the clutch.

I then set my fork play and got 3mm (when the spec for me is from 3 to 4). I do this by pushing (hard by hand) the exposed fork end away from my slave with a tape-measure held alongside. This play ensures my release bearing won't be making contact with my pressure-plate-release-fingers when my foot is off the clutch.

I then go back and measure my "overall pedal freeplay" (which determines the "engagement point"). I do this by pushing the pedal down with my hand (and with a tape measure alongside) until it hits the point where a foot is really needed to push it further. (This is the point where the release bearing has hit the release fingers.) And I note that the above adjustments have given me 30mm (when the FSM says it should be between 30 and 50).

So my engagement point is actually 215-30 = 185mm above the floor...

This is what I've got and as you can see it is "the highest acceptable pedal engagement point" within the specification for my BJ40

So ... what actually is your pedal engagement point? (You provide no figures.)

I think you may simply be unhappy with the way Toyota designed your clutch?

If you want a significantly different engagement point to mine then I suspect you'll have to completely over-ride the FSM specifications. (And if you've got a differently-sized slave or master there compared to what you should have then you'll have to ignore the FSM anyway. But you'll still need freeplays that prevent premature clutch wear and that ensure things work smoothly and reliably.)

Edit: I note that the page in your FSM is different from those in both my 1978 FSM and my 1980 FSM..

For my 1979, I use the 1980 FSM because those drawings match what I've got the best...

And I don't know whether you got the gist of this post...

Subtract "your pedal freeplay figure" from your "Pedal height from toe-board figure" and you must inevitably have your "engagement pedal height figure"


Another EDIT: I think I found your FSM edition .... It's 1986 right? That edition has always puzzles me because it is said to cover models that weren't even sold in 1986 like the FJ55 and HJ45 (which both ceased production in July 1980).

And those 1986 FSM figures certainly don't apply to my BJ40. Yet strangely enough that FSM says it covers my model.

That FSM page you've posted is a mess in itself.... For instance where's the pedal height given for for the BJ series? That's ommitted yet they've provided "fork tip play" for the BJ series....

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Danny, here's a pic of my slave cylinder rod when I got it was perfectly adjusted, just for reference

Thanks Mike - I'll work this tomorrow

 

[Solace in Solitude]

@lostmarbles Tom,

Thank you for such a detailed response!

I am actually comfortable with my engagement point, high though it seems.

I hadn't used a clutch in over 30 years, when I bought 44.

I've had a number of people drive it and they are all astounded by how high it engages.

My concern is simply... That I might be inadvertently 'riding the clutch'.

Your numbers sound very similiar to mine - I hope to run through
The steps again today, but I have some fmily matters to resolve first.

Thanks!

 

[lostmarbles]

Hi Danny..

One inspector I had doing a road-worthy check on my BJ40 told me my clutch needed adjustment .... presumably because he didn't like the engagement point..

(I don't let many people drive it but I have no choice with vehicle inspectors.)

Anyway, I just ignored his advice because I knew it was all set up correctly (as per the 1980 36044 FSM) and performing well for me.

A 40-series should never be compared to a car... They have their own special character and the clutch engagement point is no doubt part of that IMO

Good luck with your family issues.... Family always comes first!!!!!

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Thanks Tom (@lostmarbles)! Family issues are working out.

Regarding my FSM: I ordered it from Helm. It's the only Toyota FSM I've seen, so I thought it was the correct (1978) FSM. There is no real vehicle year on it - I assumed it was 1978, that's what I paid for. The only dates I can find are inside the back cover:

At any rate, I converted your mm measurements to fractions of inches and re-checked everything. It was all within hundredths of inches of your measurements.

The engagement point didn't change (last half inch (12-13mm) of pedal). Again, I'm not unhappy with where it engages... Just want to be sure I'm not inadvertently riding the clutch.

I went back and changed the slave rod to the approximate length shown in Mike's (@78fj40mg) picture. Same result.

I went back and adjusted the m/c rod to allow 1.5" of free play (per @pb4ugo ). same result.

I went back and shortened the slave rod even more and I am quite satisfied with the results - it engages just below 1" of top of pedal.

It's possible this was simply an exercise in futility - it's possible it was engaging where Toyota intended....

Regardless, I am now sure I'm not inadvertently riding the clutch all the time.

Thanks everyone for the insights you offered - I really appreciate it!!

 

[Howard705]

Keep in mind that as the clutch wears the rod on the slave cyl tightens up-needs to be shortened Thus also raises all points on the pedal. If you check it regularly u will b ok . if you leave rod shorter you will have pre-adjustment/safety factor built in.

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Thanks Howard!

 

[78fj40mg]

Thanks Tom (@lostmarbles)! Family issues are working out.

Regarding my FSM: I ordered it from Helm. It's the only Toyota FSM I've seen, so I thought it was the correct (1978) FSM. There is no real vehicle year on it - I assumed it was 1978, that's what I paid for. The only dates I can find are inside the back cover:

View attachment 1018546

At any rate, I converted your mm measurements to fractions of inches and re-checked everything. It was all within hundredths of inches of your measurements.

The engagement point didn't change (last half inch (12-13mm) of pedal). Again, I'm not unhappy with where it engages... Just want to be sure I'm not inadvertently riding the clutch.

I went back and changed the slave rod to the approximate length shown in Mike's (@78fj40mg) picture. Same result.

I went back and adjusted the m/c rod to allow 1.5" of free play (per @pb4ugo ). same result.

I went back and shortened the slave rod even more and I am quite satisfied with the results - it engages just below 1" of top of pedal.

It's possible this was simply an exercise in futility - it's possible it was engaging where Toyota intended....

Regardless, I am now sure I'm not inadvertently riding the clutch all the time.

Thanks everyone for the insights you offered - I really appreciate it!!

Danny, my FSM has a copyright date of 1976, I'll be more than happy to scan all the pertinent pages relating to clutch adjustment and email them to you, please let me know.

P.S. I believe these FSMs are not year specific just engine specific, but I could be wrong in my assumption.

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Danny, my FSM has a copyright date of 1976, I'll be more than happy to scan all the pertinent pages relating to clutch adjustment and email them to you, please let me know.

P.S. I believe these FSMs are not year specific just engine specific, but I could be wrong in my assumption.

Thanks Mike! I would like to see how your's differs from mine.

Thanks!

 

[78fj40mg]

Danny, here's the FSM clutch adjustment docs if you want a pdf file let me know and I'll email it to you.

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Perfect Mike - thanks!

 

[lostmarbles]

Nice to see you got it sorted while I've been away Danny.

Just for interests sake here's the slightly different clutch set-up specs from the 1980 36044 FSM.

I've been using these 1980 specs (rightly or wrongly) for my 1979.

And I suspect what I have been calling "my 1986 edition of 98154E FSM" is really just a 1986 reprint of an earlier one (with Toyota simply forgetting to include the page that says so).

 

[KOOTENAY KRUZER]

I have owned 3 LandCruiser 40s (FJ40, BJ40 (which I still have), BJ42 (also still have) and all of them had high clutch engagement. The FJ40 and BJ40 were fresh off the showroom floor. This has never caused a problem other than the embarrassment of stalling someone else's vehicle because their clutch engaged before expected.

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Thanks Tom! I hope you had a great trip!

Good to know Wayne!! I hadn't used a clutch in 30+ years and didn't notice the high engagement until others mentioned it - actually, until others couldn't let enough pedal out to start moving. It now engages about an inch from the top and I feel better knowing I won't be inadvertently riding the clutch. Thanks!!

 

[lostmarbles]

Thanks Tom! I hope you had a great trip!

Yep.. Went pretty well Danny... Here are some pics..
This is with Mt Ruapehu and Mt Ngauruhoe in the background

And we stayed for a couple of days where there are quite a few interesting aircraft (to say the least).

Don't ask why that one says "US Army" because I wouldn't have a clue...

And this is a small town called Taihape where they hold Gumboot Festivals and Gumboot throwing competitions (and have a peculiar obsession with this footwear as you can see from the "Quilted Gumboot" shop in the background..

The Land Cruiser (nicknamed Tojo by my ) covered the 1000+ km OK except the brake lights kept staying on (and I kept forgetting to lift the pedal up whenever I got out) due to a weak pedal-return-spring (I think) and the handbrake became absolutely useless (and I suspect some oil must have weeped out of the rear transfer seal to cause this although there is no external sign of that leak).

Oh yeah.... And I've confirmed that there is a very small coolant weep from the solder seam on the lower header tank so the radiator's got to come back out AGAIN for me to repair that too..

(Just typing this has already made me feel a bit depressed... I've yet to clean the damn thing from the journey too..

 

[78fj40mg]

Tom, beautiful pics thanks for sharing!

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Thanks (@lostmarbles ) Tom!! I love seeing beautiful pictures!! Sure glad I don't have to pronounce any of those names! Sorry you've found those issues, but glad you made it back, under your own steam (pun intended)!

EDIT: I just realized you didn't say where that US Army plan was located - what town was it in?

US Army tail number 38031 was an O-1 Bird Dog, flown by the 220th Aviation Company (CatKillers), in Viet Nam (220th supported the 1st Marine Division Air Operations) - these were Forward Air Controllers (FAC) - the Marines called them Tactical Air Controllers Airborne (TACA). They were the guys who controlled air strikes, from these slow planes, about 100 feet up, with no real protection.

I found a copyrighted black-and-white picture of this plane on CATKILLERS webpage (about half way down the page, if anyone is interested)... not sure how it got to New Zealand... unless the Bermuda Triangle grabbed it on the way back from Nam...

I'm going to email catkillers.org and see if they know... here's the catkiller patch

 

[lostmarbles]

That plane is on the Coromandel Peninsular at the moment in a little coastal resort called Pauanui.

Here's some more shots I took this week at the same place:

I hope I'm not upsetting the owner of the plane.. (This place is a sort of "playground" for many overseas people...)

They even put on free loop-the-loop displays in the sky but the locals are so used to it they seldom even look up...

 

[Solace in Solitude]

Thanks Tom - great pics!!

I'm sure the owner wants pictures taken or he would repaint it.