hyraulic or mechanical linkage

[jimmyhat]

I know i have asked this but i am tryingt o save myself the grief....
Not sure what to do here... I have a 5.0L 91 with a bellhousing np435 hooked to a np205. Right now heading mechanical and starting to wonder if body flex etc is going to give me issues in the linkage?
Does anyone have links on pictures of linkage they have if they're running the mechanical?

Or is more leaning towards the hydro linkage?

 

[Broncobowsher]

are you running the bellhousing that originalyy came with the '91 engine or the bellhousing that originally came with the NP435/(stock bronco bellhousing)?

You should be able to just run the stock Bronco linkage unless you are trying to use a late model bellhousing. If that is the case then you will need to look at the ZF swap articles nd see what they are doing, then hope what you have is close enough to that.

 

[Bronco Brian]

I use the Bronco bellhousing and linkage with no problem. I wheel simi hard (used the W/H EFI Clutch Equalizer Bracket) have somefriends same set up they wheels HARD no problems. HOPE THIS HELPS

 

[Past_Miner]

I have the ZF with the hydraulic clutch. Offhand I would say you should stick with the mechanical linkage. I do believe that the ZF slave cylinder would bolt in place of the np435 front bearing retainer and work with your set-up. I have never tried to fit one on a 435 though so don't quote me. If you have a late model bellhousing without provisions for a mechanical linkage you could try a hydraulic.

However, the hydraulics are a mixed bag, IMO. I am just finishing a slave cylinder replacement and it is not fun. In order to replace the slave you have to pull the transmission. In the process I broke my hydraulic line at the slave cylinder connection. By the time I bought a new line, robbed the ends off of it, found a hydraulic shop that could build me a custom one that would fit the Bronco and got it home I had $115 in the line alone. The slave cylinder was about $70. The new slave cylinder was so much tighter than the old one the master blew a seal and went bad. That was another $100 and my back hurts.

To be fair, this slave cylinder has lasted for 10+ years, so over the long run it has been relatively inexpensive and has worked well. The mechanical linkage I ran before the ZF swap never gave me any problems either and it was much easier to work on.

 

[Redleg06]

Hyro rules!

On my jeep I went to a hydro setup that has an external slave cylinder. Bolted right on, and no linkage adjustment/binding/falling off issues ever again. Of course jeeps flex alot more than broncos but if you can go hydraulic with an external slave it is definitely the way to go.

 

[BwoncoHowie]

If you can instal Hyd, do it. Mechanical linkage is a large contributor to clutch chatter on the early bronco during high torque situations.

I know i have asked this but i am tryingt o save myself the grief....
Not sure what to do here... I have a 5.0L 91 with a bellhousing np435 hooked to a np205. Right now heading mechanical and starting to wonder if body flex etc is going to give me issues in the linkage?
Does anyone have links on pictures of linkage they have if they're running the mechanical?

Or is more leaning towards the hydro linkage?

 

[Smokeater11]

http://classicbroncos.com/hydraulicclutch.shtml

This is the tech article about the external hydraulic clutch setup. I don't think it is with the NP 435 but it will give you an idea of what you are looking at when going hydraulic. Hope this helps. I am going to go hydro when I get to that point in my build.

 

[Dave]

I lived with a clutch chattering manual linkage on a 435 for years. Swapped it out for a ZF with hydraulic and would never go back. Don't know if the ZF style concentric (internal) slave will fit on the front of the NP435. If it will and you can bolt it up to the front of the tranny, I would give it serious consideration.