Cable vs. Hydraulic Clutch - Pros/Cons

[EdM]

Would appreciate folks views on the subject. Hoping to do a TKO 600 swap (along with an engine swap) next year. Appreciated.

 

[Jeff73Mach1]

cable is cheaper, takes less time to set up and doesn't require bleeding or the addition of a slave cylinder

Hydraulic will give lighter pedal effort and you won't have to worry about cable adjustment or potential breakage. It will present a little cleaner set up, but it is definitely a bit more work.

 

[73pony]

+1 on the cable. Just be certain to get a good quality cable that is thick. If you have a thinner cheaper cable and a decent amount of clutch pressure the cable will stretch and need adjustment periodically until it snaps. I went with the MDL pedal and cable set up and have not had to adjust it since installed. It is a very thick cable but not cheap by any stretch.

 

[c9zx]

Having owned both types, I'll take the hydraulic set up. Just one opinion. Chuck

 

[EdM]

Having owned both types, I'll take the hydraulic set up. Just one opinion. Chuck

Why?

 

[rocket366]

Went with cable clutch for cost on a no budget build.

MDL clutch pedal was $175 if I remember correctly + bearings $50

Bought a 70 Jeep cj stainless cable off ebay $40 then swagging tool $30 threaded end $15 to

swag on to shorten it and made my own under dash mount out of a piece of angle iron... I

refused to pay the $260 MDL was asking for their cable with mounting bracket.

Been abt a year now ...easy pedal effort no complaints!

Paul

 

[c9zx]

Having owned both types, I'll take the hydraulic set up. Just one opinion. Chuck

Why?

No cable to bind, stretch, or break. No relatively large quadrant to locate and securely mount. Hydraulic is smoother operating and more precise (no slack take up). I suppose it is the same reason car manufacturers switched from mechanical to hydraulic brakes 80 + years ago, effectiveness and reliability.

Chuck

 

[Tnfastbk]

Having owned both types, I'll take the hydraulic set up. Just one opinion. Chuck

Why?

No cable to bind, stretch, or break. No relatively large quadrant to locate and securely mount. Hydraulic is smoother operating and more precise (no slack take up). I suppose it is the same reason car manufacturers switched from mechanical to hydraulic brakes 80 + years ago, effectiveness and reliability.

Chuck

+1 Chuck.

I have the American Powertrain hydraulic set up along with a TKO 600 in my car.

 

[Otto]

I agree with the above opinions on the hydraulic clutch being the better option for the reasons already brought up. It is what I am going to go with down the line on my '72 Mach 1. The kit I'm looking at is the American Powertrain. I have already done a TKO 600 conversion, which is a must for modern performance. If anyone has thought about it, DO IT. I cruise at 85 mph at about 2300 rpm and my engine sounds bored.

If you are pressed for money, you could also modify the mechanical linkage for a more precise feel. I replaced the factory clutch rod and push rod with 1/2 steel bar and heim joint ends (found on Amazon.com of all places). There is absolutely no play or sloppiness. If anyone is interested I can detail it on a post. The only down side to my method is modern clutches only use about 1/3 of the pedal travel as our cars originally came with, so you don't actually work the clutch until the bottom five inches or so. You get used to it very quickly though.

 

[EdM]

Appreciate the replies gentlemen. Looks like I will go hydraulic.