Narrowing down on clutch brand! Which is best with least problems? - 8th Generation Honda Civic Forum
8thCivic.com

Go Back   8th Generation Honda Civic Forum > Honda Civic Technical > Bolt-Ons And All-Motor > Clutch & Transmission

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-26-2010, 06:43 AM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MugenCivicSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blaine, MN
Posts: 1,241
Michael
Narrowing down on clutch brand! Which is best with least problems?

Ok, i'm Choosing between each of these brands with their STAGE 2 CLUTCH AND PRESSURE PLATE PACKAGES. There have been people with problems with some clutches like act so i didn't include them, and there are some problems with some of these brands also.

The mods that i have are i/h/e + Stage 2 cams + ported IM and 06 TSX TB.

I need to get input on which of these three clutches are the best with the least problems associated with them...

First up is the ClutchMasters Clutch Stage 2 = $495



FX200 (Stage II)

* Extra long life street system
* Holding capacity 70% over stock
* Heavy-Duty reinforced pressure plate
* Hi-Leverage™ pressure ring design
* Sprung hub/cushioned disc
* Steel backed Carbon Kevlar friction material

All Clutch Masters systems come complete with:

* Pressure Plate
* Clutch Disc
* Throw-out Bearing (when applicable)
* Pilot Bearing or Bushing (when applicable)
* Alignment Tool

2nd up is the Exedy Cerametallic Stage 2 = $415



Exedy Cerametallic Stage II -- Fits the 06+ Civic Si (K-Series) Models

EXEDY cerametallic clutches are designed to handle the abuse of high power modified engines. The cerametallic friction material can handle much more slippage than stock type disc assemblies without slipping and fading.

All EXEDY cerametallic clutch discs have spring center dampers to reduce the impact and shock loads put into the drivetrain. This protects the transmission and the rest of the drive line system.

EXEDY offer two types of cerametallic discs - normal thickness adn reduce thickness. The reduced thickness (thin cerametallic) disc offer greatly reduced inertia to improve shift effects, make for faster shifting, and improve synchro durability. These discs are approximatelt 1/2 the thickness of a stock disc AND IS USED FOR TRACK ONLY.

Normal thickness (thick cerametallic) discs have better heat capacity and therefore better durability in demanding applications such as all wheel drive. Even with the normal thickness, our three puck cerametallic discs still typically have less inertia than a stock disc and IS GOOD FOR STREET AND TRACK.

With any cerametalic clutch system, there will be some compromise of start up driveability as compared to a stock clutch (chatter on light throttle, low rpm start up). This characteristic is general felt to be acceptable in modified performance cars. Drivers of cerametallic clutches on the street should be warned not to "ride the clutch" to try to reduce the chatter as this will greatly increase the wear.

Lastly we have the Competition Clutch Stage 2 = $382



This assembly provides approximately 80% increase in torque capacity and is properly suited for aggressive street use and moderate track use. The Carbon Kevlar material with its alloy backing matched to a performance pressure plate will provide smooth engagement and extended life. 500 mile break-in highly recommended with this set-up. 300 mile break-in REQUIRED with this set-up.

The 2100 Series kit includes a performance pressure plate, a high torque sprung disc with antiburst steel backed Carbon Kevlar facings, all applicable bearings, and the appropriate alignment tool.


If you can please provide your input on which one you recommend best??? and Why???

If you can tell me if there is a difference between the different types of material the clutches are made of and what effects or problems or benefits that they may have for my setup???

I already know that using the stock flywheel is just fine and it just needs resurfacing, so please keep that discussion elsewhere.

Last edited by MugenCivicSI; 02-26-2010 at 06:45 AM.
MugenCivicSI is offline  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-26-2010, 06:49 AM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MugenCivicSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blaine, MN
Posts: 1,241
Michael
Please keep the thread clean and no bashing allowed! This is an advice thread and may be helpful to many who are burning out their stock clutches and need a new one.

F.Y.I. YOU NEED A NEW CLUTCH IF IT GETS VERY HARD TO SHIFT AT HIGH RPMS. Took some time to research to figure this out. The stock OEM clutch is just too weak for holding the amount of torque anything beyond a stock k20.
MugenCivicSI is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-27-2010, 10:08 AM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
kadamski5140's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lockport, IL
Age: 29
Posts: 269
Karol Adamski
Quote:
Originally Posted by MugenCivicSI View Post
Please keep the thread clean and no bashing allowed! This is an advice thread and may be helpful to many who are burning out their stock clutches and need a new one.

F.Y.I. YOU NEED A NEW CLUTCH IF IT GETS VERY HARD TO SHIFT AT HIGH RPMS. Took some time to research to figure this out. The stock OEM clutch is just too weak for holding the amount of torque anything beyond a stock k20.
my car has every single bolt on you can think of. Next week im putting in stage 2 cams, valve train, hc valves, hr tct. also will be upgrading the tranny with stage 2 cc clutch and cc flywheel (the lightweight one, not the ultra lightweight), 5.062 fd, and omni cmc. i will let you know how it goes and how it holds up after i break in the clutch. i might post up some videos if im able to also.
kadamski5140 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-01-2010, 02:56 AM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MugenCivicSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blaine, MN
Posts: 1,241
Michael
Quote:
Originally Posted by kadamski5140 View Post
my car has every single bolt on you can think of. Next week im putting in stage 2 cams, valve train, hc valves, hr tct. also will be upgrading the tranny with stage 2 cc clutch and cc flywheel (the lightweight one, not the ultra lightweight), 5.062 fd, and omni cmc. i will let you know how it goes and how it holds up after i break in the clutch. i might post up some videos if im able to also.
alright...let me know if there is a problem at all with the CC brand. if not then it looks pretty good.
MugenCivicSI is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-01-2010, 05:07 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member

 
Bboy_Burst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Age: 27
Posts: 4,761
Ku
Quote:
Originally Posted by MugenCivicSI View Post

F.Y.I. YOU NEED A NEW CLUTCH IF IT GETS VERY HARD TO SHIFT AT HIGH RPMS. Took some time to research to figure this out. The stock OEM clutch is just too weak for holding the amount of torque anything beyond a stock k20.
is 190lb of torque too much for stock clutch? lolz
Bboy_Burst is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-03-2010, 10:57 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MugenCivicSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blaine, MN
Posts: 1,241
Michael
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bboy_Burst View Post
is 190lb of torque too much for stock clutch? lolz
stock clutch could handle normal driving, but when you're running it 9-10 times per weekend, then NO. thats why some people experience grinding tranny or have a hard time to shift in high RPMs than before when the stock clutch was newer. i have i/h/e + stage 2 cams, and when i just do a few runs last night, it was pretty hard to shift into 4th gear now....and gets harder and harder everytime i try to when at high RPM. clutch gets too hot and won't engage. honda tuning did an article about how the si's tranny starts to get slower to shift and harder to shift when they were tracking it at the streets of willow. and it was a stock silver si coupe too.
MugenCivicSI is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-11-2010, 11:58 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
uh you have misleading statements that aren't necessarily true about the OEM clutch and for reasons why you need a new clutch...

Not being able to shift at a high RPM could be a number of different things.

As for your list I'd do competition but even that brand has issues. Seems to be hit or miss. My stage 2 has been great for almost a year/10k miles and now I'm having a lot of issues which means either the clutch is dying or my master cylinder isn't taking it anymore.

Since my car is daily driven and I won't be taking it to the drag strip anymore I will probably just go with the exedy stage 1 and be over with it.
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-12-2010, 08:13 AM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
PainIs4ThaWeak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 29
Posts: 6,461
8thCivicRidesPoles
^ Aren't you SC'd though xlai?
PainIs4ThaWeak is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-13-2010, 02:52 PM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
yep..

why?
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-13-2010, 02:59 PM   #10 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by realxlai View Post
uh you have misleading statements that aren't necessarily true about the OEM clutch and for reasons why you need a new clutch...

Not being able to shift at a high RPM could be a number of different things.

As for your list I'd do competition but even that brand has issues. Seems to be hit or miss. My stage 2 has been great for almost a year/10k miles and now I'm having a lot of issues which means either the clutch is dying or my master cylinder isn't taking it anymore.

Since my car is daily driven and I won't be taking it to the drag strip anymore I will probably just go with the exedy stage 1 and be over with it.
Wow, exact same thing here. Currently been on CC stg2 for about 10k miles, but planning a switch to the Exedy stg1 for drivability soon. Also s/c'd.
shrykhar is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-13-2010, 03:45 PM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
yeah, Some nonsense bro.
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 08:22 AM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 2,993
Fred
i was wondering why ppl go with stage 2 over stage 1 in the first place? is is suppose to be better for racing or something?
neogod is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 11:25 AM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
PainIs4ThaWeak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 29
Posts: 6,461
8thCivicRidesPoles
Quote:
Originally Posted by realxlai View Post
yep..

why?
Because if you're looking at manufacturer specs on most stage 1 clutches, most of them range from a 200-215ft lb torque rating. I dunno, here I am thinking I'd see +215ft lbs with my 3.15" / header w 3" collector / 3" exh / and the other usual supporting mods + tune, so now you make me wonder about my decision to go CC stg 2 off the bat (did get the omni however tho)

But to get back to my point - You not worried about it holding with just a stg 1 clutch?
PainIs4ThaWeak is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 11:33 AM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
PainIs4ThaWeak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 29
Posts: 6,461
8thCivicRidesPoles
Quote:
Originally Posted by neogod View Post
i was wondering why ppl go with stage 2 over stage 1 in the first place? is is suppose to be better for racing or something?
Umm - the holding capacity could be the selling point - but I mean, who cares about holding capacity anyway.

215ft lb exedy stg 1 vs ~250ft lb CC stg 2 (e.g. - stock + 80%). Yea you'll never see 250ft lb on 3.15" pulley, but at least for me it gives the piece of mind knowing I'm not gonna run through it.

Last edited by PainIs4ThaWeak; 03-14-2010 at 11:37 AM.
PainIs4ThaWeak is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 01:14 PM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
Quote:
Originally Posted by PainIs4ThaWeak View Post
Because if you're looking at manufacturer specs on most stage 1 clutches, most of them range from a 200-215ft lb torque rating. I dunno, here I am thinking I'd see +215ft lbs with my 3.15" / header w 3" collector / 3" exh / and the other usual supporting mods + tune, so now you make me wonder about my decision to go CC stg 2 off the bat (did get the omni however tho)

But to get back to my point - You not worried about it holding with just a stg 1 clutch?
I'd go stage 4 if you got the Omni CMC... I would go omni but like I said to some other people, I'm not trying to feel like I'm at a gym doing leg presses every time I drive. I nuked my stage 2 in a year so that'll show you how great that was... take it with a grain of salt. It was a great clutch but our stock CMC is weak and I rather get a more reliable daily driver clutch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PainIs4ThaWeak View Post
Umm - the holding capacity could be the selling point - but I mean, who cares about holding capacity anyway.

215ft lb exedy stg 1 vs ~250ft lb CC stg 2 (e.g. - stock + 80%). Yea you'll never see 250ft lb on 3.15" pulley, but at least for me it gives the piece of mind knowing I'm not gonna run through it.
I believe also those torque ratings are not wheel torque... There are plenty of people on stock clutches and Stage 2 Sc'd. You just need to find what is right for your application. I drive my car to school everyday, I can't have time down over a blown CMC and rather not have an un enjoyable ride trying to smash down a heavy clutch either.

But if you're racing at the strip you're going to want that stage 4. My stage 2 only saw 10K miles and 3 hard days at the drag strip.
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 01:23 PM   #16 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
PainIs4ThaWeak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 29
Posts: 6,461
8thCivicRidesPoles
^ Even more of a reason in my mind to stick with a stg 2 or better for boost. I do believe you're right about tq ratings being rated in brake torque and not wheel torque. So for me, I think I'd rather stick with stage 2 over a stage 1 for the holding power, and over a stage 4 for the drivability factor - besides, I won't be seeing stage 4 torque numbers with my setup (unless I do meth, aftercooler, smaller pulley - which I'd rather not deal with seeing as this is my daily - my 240 has been blessed with the bigger plans )

But I totally get what you are saying. Not knocking it, just concerned for you man

EDIT - I AM curious to see how it works out for you though, as drivability is a big concern for myself as well, only 2nd to holding capacity (when it comes to clutches), so if I could run with an organic compound instead of kevlar, without the worry of driving through it, I'd happily go back to organic.

Last edited by PainIs4ThaWeak; 03-14-2010 at 01:33 PM.
PainIs4ThaWeak is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-14-2010, 02:02 PM   #17 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
The stage 4 and 2 will drive exactly the same so just get the 4. They run the same pressure plates from Stage 1-5. The stage 4 seems to hold up a lot better to abuse than the 2 does. Also if I am right about it being brake torque then supercharger setups would make over the stage 2 ratings .

Yeah man. The way I see it in my own situation I rather have it be great to daily drive and to romp around on the highway and when I do decide to make more power I feel I should have the money for another clutch anyway since I'd spend so much upgrading everything else lol
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-15-2010, 09:29 AM   #18 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
PainIs4ThaWeak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 29
Posts: 6,461
8thCivicRidesPoles
Quote:
Originally Posted by realxlai View Post
The stage 4 and 2 will drive exactly the same so just get the 4. They run the same pressure plates from Stage 1-5. The stage 4 seems to hold up a lot better to abuse than the 2 does. Also if I am right about it being brake torque then supercharger setups would make over the stage 2 ratings .
Not calling you out, but I've always been under the impression that pucked-type disks are a little more of a harsh ride than a full face disk.

Also, being that the stage 4 is ceramic - the trade off between it an the stage 2 would probably be increased chatter, higher possibility of ruining the clutch from glazing (as ceramic doesn't recover from such as well as kevlar or organic compounds), and increased flywheel wear over kevlar/organic.

But, I'm curious about brake tq #s even with a true 3" exhaust setup (collector-back). Lets say I'd see 220ft lb wtq, which is probably a high estimate, I just can't forsee losing nearly 30ft lbs in the drive train (I.E. - ~250ft lb btq vs. ~220ft lb wtq). Even if I could expect to see an approximate ~30ft lb loss in tq from the drivetrain, I would imagine that the stage 2 would still fit my needs.
(You see how much I'm trying to justify this, lol - cuz I already bought the stage 2, lmao!) But seriously, tell me I'm wrong if I'm wrong.
PainIs4ThaWeak is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-16-2010, 01:03 AM   #19 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MugenCivicSI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blaine, MN
Posts: 1,241
Michael
Quote:
Originally Posted by neogod View Post
i was wondering why ppl go with stage 2 over stage 1 in the first place? is is suppose to be better for racing or something?
durability and higher torque rating.
MugenCivicSI is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-16-2010, 02:59 AM   #20 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
realxlai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 35,840
M. Bison
Quote:
Originally Posted by PainIs4ThaWeak View Post
Not calling you out, but I've always been under the impression that pucked-type disks are a little more of a harsh ride than a full face disk.

Also, being that the stage 4 is ceramic - the trade off between it an the stage 2 would probably be increased chatter, higher possibility of ruining the clutch from glazing (as ceramic doesn't recover from such as well as kevlar or organic compounds), and increased flywheel wear over kevlar/organic.

But, I'm curious about brake tq #s even with a true 3" exhaust setup (collector-back). Lets say I'd see 220ft lb wtq, which is probably a high estimate, I just can't forsee losing nearly 30ft lbs in the drive train (I.E. - ~250ft lb btq vs. ~220ft lb wtq). Even if I could expect to see an approximate ~30ft lb loss in tq from the drivetrain, I would imagine that the stage 2 would still fit my needs.
(You see how much I'm trying to justify this, lol - cuz I already bought the stage 2, lmao!) But seriously, tell me I'm wrong if I'm wrong.
Well remember since you're supercharged (I am too) we suffer from parasitic loss. We see a pretty high crank HP which I would think would effect what our clutch sees. I'm merely theorizing here but I do remember reading that from Hondata, the high crank HP I mean.

As for driving I've drove both and they felt the same at least IMO
realxlai is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the 8th Generation Honda Civic Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Clutch Problems... Yazy1987 Civic SI 20 11-23-2011 08:20 PM
clutch problems instructor74 Mechanical Problems & Technical Chat 3 05-26-2009 10:50 PM
Clutch Problems ricetastic Mechanical Problems & Technical Chat 2 07-22-2008 11:42 AM
Clutch Problems grey_blur Mechanical Problems & Technical Chat 20 05-25-2008 11:56 AM
clutch problems m0ren0 Garage 12 05-08-2008 01:25 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:56 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.
copyright 8thcivic.com - all rights reserved