M1008 NV4500 swap

[broke1008truck]

I did search, and didn't see the answer I was looking for. I apologize upfront if I just missed it. As the title states, I want to install an NV4500 in my truck. I bought a 1998 K3500 trans, and would like to use it. My question is can the Advanced Adapters belohousing be used with the early mechanical style clutch linkage? Every swap I've seen has been with the hydraulic master and slave cylinders. I don't really want to run the hydraulic system for simplicity, and since it's not some torque monster, I plan on running something close to a stock clutch. The other reason, man guys want stupid expensive money for square body Chevy truck hydraulic clutch/brake pedal setups. Again, I apologize if I missed this piece of information in the posts I've read about the swaps. Also, thank you to those that went to the trouble to document the swaps.

 

[broke1008truck]

I did search, and didn't see the answer I was looking for. I apologize upfront if I just missed it. As the title states, I want to install an NV4500 in my truck. I bought a 1998 K3500 trans, and would like to use it. My question is can the Advanced Adapters belohousing be used with the early mechanical style clutch linkage? Every swap I've seen has been with the hydraulic master and slave cylinders. I don't really want to run the hydraulic system for simplicity, and since it's not some torque monster, I plan on running something close to a stock clutch. The other reason, man guys want stupid expensive money for square body Chevy truck hydraulic clutch/brake pedal setups. Again, I apologize if I missed this piece of information in the posts I've read about the swaps. Also, thank you to those that went to the trouble to document the swaps.

 

[broke1008truck]

My new to me junk yard NV4500

 

[Barrman]

I put a NV4500 behind a 6.2 in my M715 12 years ago. I could not find a proven workable mechanical clutch throw out collection of parts at the time. I have not looked since then, but my hours of vehicle related internet time every day has revealed nothing on this subject.

2 things to add:

Besides making my M715 a hydraulic clutch. I have converted 2 other M715 trucks to hydraulic for other people when swapping engine/transmission set ups. The pedal to master cylinder connection is really the hardest part to fabricate and get correct. The ‘98 you have I think has the hydraulic throw out bearing. That really is a good set up. Much better than the externally mounted early NV4500 slave cylinders that interfere with the passenger side drive shaft.

The NV4500 requires special really expensive oil and does not tolerate forced shifts. Also, the input shaft bearing is not very robust. At least that has been my experience.

 

[broke1008truck]

I put a NV4500 behind a 6.2 in my M715 12 years ago. I could not find a proven workable mechanical clutch throw out collection of parts at the time. I have not looked since then, but my hours of vehicle related internet time every day has revealed nothing on this subject.

2 things to add:

Besides making my M715 a hydraulic clutch. I have converted 2 other M715 trucks to hydraulic for other people when swapping engine/transmission set ups. The pedal to master cylinder connection is really the hardest part to fabricate and get correct. The ‘98 you have I think has the hydraulic throw out bearing. That really is a good set up. Much better than the externally mounted early NV4500 slave cylinders that interfere with the passenger side drive shaft.

The NV4500 requires special really expensive oil and does not tolerate forced shifts. Also, the input shaft bearing is not very robust. At least that has been my experience.

Thanks for the response. The transmission I bought does use the hydraulic throw out bearing. I thought that it wouldn't work with the master cylinder, because Advanced Adapters sells a bellhousing to use the external slave cylinder. If I have to go hydraulic, I will. I agree the hydraulic throw out bearing will be better for front drive shaft. I think I have seen adapter fittings for factory pinned line connectors. Do you know if the square body master cylinder will work with the hydro throw out bearing?

 

[Ilikemtb999]

Thanks for the response. The transmission I bought does use the hydraulic throw out bearing. I thought that it wouldn't work with the master cylinder, because Advanced Adapters sells a bellhousing to use the external slave cylinder. If I have to go hydraulic, I will. I agree the hydraulic throw out bearing will be better for front drive shaft. I think I have seen adapter fittings for factory pinned line connectors. Do you know if the square body master cylinder will work with the hydro throw out bearing?

If you’ve got a late model with the internal slave you can just use that setup.
The AA setup moves it externally if you buy the added bracket, that’s what I have in my m1009. You can also just use it with mechanical linkage like a standard square body but I have no done it personally.

 

[broke1008truck]

If you’ve got a late model with the internal slave you can just use that setup.
The AA setup moves it externally if you buy the added bracket, that’s what I have in my m1009. You can also just use it with mechanical linkage like a standard square body but I have no done it personally.

That's good to know. I want to use mechanical linkage because I have all of that from other projects. I like the simplicity of it, and don't want to worry about hydraulic failures. Back in the 90's, I swapped 3 different GM 3rd gen F body cars from auto to manual. 2 Trans AMs and one Camaro. I bring this up because that platform of car also came with manual clutch linkage to 1984, and then 85 and up were all hydraulic. I learned the hard way that a hydraulic bellhousing will bolt up, all the mechanical linkage will bolt up, but because of the placement of the clutch fork/arm ball, you won't be able to push the pedal down. The clutch fork pivot ball is moved for the hydraulic system for less travel. I know this from first hand experience. I guess now I need to figure out what bellhousing I need with the clutch fork ball, and make sure that the front bearing retainer is the right size for an early throw out bearing. Thank you again for your information and time. As many times as this has been done, you would think this information would be easily found.

 

[broke1008truck]

That's good to know. I want to use mechanical linkage because I have all of that from other projects. I like the simplicity of it, and don't want to worry about hydraulic failures. Back in the 90's, I swapped 3 different GM 3rd gen F body cars from auto to manual. 2 Trans AMs and one Camaro. I bring this up because that platform of car also came with manual clutch linkage to 1984, and then 85 and up were all hydraulic. I learned the hard way that a hydraulic bellhousing will bolt up, all the mechanical linkage will bolt up, but because of the placement of the clutch fork/arm ball, you won't be able to push the pedal down. The clutch fork pivot ball is moved for the hydraulic system for less travel. I know this from first hand experience. I guess now I need to figure out what bellhousing I need with the clutch fork ball, and make sure that the front bearing retainer is the right size for an early throw out bearing. Thank you again for your information and time. As many times as this has been done, you would think this information would be easily found.

After talking with Advanced Adaptors tech support, they said that their 712756 bellhousing will work with the mechanical clutch linkage.