Hello everyone! New to the forums and have lots of questions on my old girl.

Since 2020, I've been working on a 1985 Firebird base model. This last fall, my fuel pump and sending unit went out. I didn't have much time to work on it so I took her to a shop who broke a lot more than they fixed. One thing they did was burn up my clutch. I was looking at taking on the job this spring with my father, but he got into a nasty car wreck and now can't get under any kind of car anymore. Over this winter as well, I was responsible for repairs on every other family member's cars. This spring, however, I'm looking at replacing the burnt up clutch. My dad did it once on an 85 IROC without removing the transmission. I've looked up how to do this, but every tutorial I see, they remove the transmission.

Currently I'm doing this project in my driveway, and while I've done several "garage" projects in my driveway, this one is kind of intimidating to me. I was wondering if any of you have done this repair without removing the transmission and if so, how you did it and what I'll need to do it myself.

Many thanks!

 

It is not possible to remove or replace the clutch without removing the transmission.

 

Yep, the trans must be dropped.

JamesC

 

Video, or it didn't happen.

Once you dig into it, you'll see exactly why it's impossible.

Or, on the other hand, get him to show you himself how he did that.

 

Very impressive considering that the transmission input shaft goes through the clutch and prevents the bell housing from coming off that would be tough. Good news it is not hard. Pull the shifter, pull the drive shaft, unbolt the 4 transmission bolts, put jack under transmission, remove cross member and slide back transmission. Unbolt bell housing and put in new clutch.

 

With tranny out u can check the flywheel, pressure plate..

 

Sorry your father was hurt. Changing a clutch isn't too bad, I did it on my '89 V6 when I was young with no experience or teacher whatsoever. The input shaft of the trans passes through the clutch, so the trans has to be pulled away from engine and then dropped to the ground. It will be very very tipsy on a jack so having a helping hand from a friend helps a ton. Other than that it's just nuts and bolts. The risky part is bring it up and down with the weight of the trans above your head.

 

I would like to see that video too. I am sure it is possible to REMOVE it, but you would not be able to re-install it or re-use the bell housing. lol

 

As mentioned before, he has been involved in a car wreck and can't show me how. Getting under the car isn't an option for him anymore.

 

Thank you, sincerely. You've been the most helpful person in this thread so far. I'll look into this some more.

 

Also put a block of wood between engine and firewall. The engine will want to rotate and fall down in the back as soon as the transmission is unbolted. The block of wood will keep that from happening and save the distributor from being crushed.

Or better yet, put cribbing under the engine so it dang well can't move.

 

You could technically leave the trans in the car and pull the engine!

 

As has been stated already, the engine and trans needs to be separated to remove the clutch. No way around it. Could pull the motor and leave the transmission in place, but dropping the transmission is easier unless you need to pull the motor for some other reason.

Dropping the transmission really isn’t that hard. Then, the bellhousing and clutch are right there and easy to remove and reinstall.

Here’s a tip for removing the shifter. No need to take apart the center console to remove the shifter from the top. After disconnecting the driveshaft, torque arm and crossmember, lower the back of the transmission down a little bit with a floor jack and reach up with a wrench to remove the 4 bolts holding the shifter to the trans. Then go inside the car and yank the shifter upward to separate it from the transmission and just leave the shifter there. Much quicker than going in from the car.

 

Damnit, was just going to say that.

Pat

 

I suspect your dad had replaced a flexplate (flywheel) on an automatic trans. in his IROC. This can be done by sliding the trans. back some. Repacing a clutch is some difficult for someone who hasn't done it before.

 

Yep, Shifty beat us to it (it was my first thought when I read the thread title as well)

Sure, it'd be like 10 times the work, but it IS possible . I like Tom3's answer the best, it likely was a flexplate that the OP's father replaced, and a clutch really isn't a job for a novice mechanic, miss one tiny step and R&Ring that transmission can become real old real fast

 

I had to pull the 5 speed manual transmission out of my 1989 Formula today because it is still leaking fluid (small drip, but annoying as hell to me). Here are a few pictures. Maybe this will help.
First, unbolt the rear U-bolts on the drive shaft. Put the car in neutral and block the rear wheels. You will need to push the car forward or backward to get to the other side bolts (it will rotate the drive shaft).
Either drain the transmission fluid or buy a plug. You can get an assortment pack at any local car parts place. Have the plug ready to put in the back of the transmission as soon as you pull out the driveshaft. Ask me how I know.
Remove the drive shaft completely and set aside.
Unhook the two electrical connections on the driver side of the transmission.
Remove three bolts that hold the torsion bar bracket onto the driver side of the transmission. You will need to swing the front of the torsion bar up and let it rest on the underside of the floor, then pull the bracket out of the transmission.
Remove the center nut that holds the crossmember to the transmission.
Remove the 4 bolts that hold the crossmember to the frame. The transmission will drop about 2-3 inches, but cannot go anywhere.
Remove the 4 bolts that hold the shifter on the top of the transmission. (picture below shows wrench on the bolts) As mentioned above, the other option is to remove the console from the inside to access the shifter bolts.
At this point, everything should be unhooked and out of the way.
Remove the 4 bolts that bolt the transmission to the bell housing (see pictures below). If the car is on level ground, you can remove all 4 bolts and the transmission will stay in place. It would probably take quite a slope for it to slide out, but just a caution anyway.
The transmission weighs about 100 lbs, so I recommend having someone to help. I pulled mine by myself, but I have done it a few times and know what to expect
While lifting up on the back of the transmission, slide it straight back away from the engine.
You will now be able to see the splined shaft that goes through the throw out bearing, clutch, and pressure plate and into the back of the engine. This is what everyone is talking about when they say you cannot remove the clutch without separating the transmission from the engine.
It may seem intimidating, but it is not that hard to do.

Good luck.

This is where the transmission shaft goes through the bell housing, clutch, and pressure plate into the back of the engine

Transmission shaft

Torsion arm bracket on driver's side

two of the four bolts that bolt the transmission to the bell housing

Wrench on one of the 4 bolts that hold the shifter on the top of the transmission

 

So, has the OP changed his clutch?
By the way, this question has been asked B4, with no final accurate answers. Has anyone now, been able to figure why in the world GM engineers decided to tilt the T-5 on an angle? I heard years ago it was done for shifter clearance, but I still don't buy it. In the future, I'll be installing mine..."straight up". (With a modified torque arm bracket.)

 

I've always suspected that angled position was to set up the clutch linkage? Might take a look at that and see if the tranny was installed normally if the clutch linkage would clear the floor pan to firewall area.

 

Now there's a new thought, I haven't heard. Worth looking into. Thanx.

 

I believe it was to put the shifter closer to the driver. Not much of a difference, but it is something.

 

I've heard similar opinions on that, but would think, if they wanted it a fraction closer, they could've just bent the lever over a smiggen, or redesigned it. Who knows. A lot of trouble to configure the drivetrain behind the eng., for that little gain in off-setting it.

 

Don't auto transmissions have clutches or clutch plates?

 

Yes auto transmissions have clutches internally; theirs are a stack of frictions splined to one thing usually on their inside dia, interspersed with steels splined to something else usually on their outside dia, often the case.

Not really material to the matter at hand here.

Yes the reason for the T-5 being at an angle in these cars is because the clutch fork, ideally, needs to go between the trans bolts; and if the trans was straight-up, the clutch fork would have had to go RIGHT DIRECTLY THROUGH the driver's right foot. 82 and early 83 cars with 4-spd had a fork that had an offset bend at a weird angle to move the push rod end to where it was below the floorboard, and it doesn't work all that well. Work, yes; well, not so much. The El Camino in about those same years had a very similar system that also had issues. The bend aspect aggravated all of the problems that the old Stone Age linkage systems had, which were even worse in these particular cars, because of their unibody construction in the front: dependency on the firewall stiffness, dependency on the motor mount not letting the engine move front-to-rear, ability to align all the arms and ***** and whatnot so that all forces are in proper directions and none are in directions that tend to bend things or break welds, etc. The rotated BH worked MUCH better overall than the design hack 4-spd setup did.

I recall one 69 Chevelle that either my late little brother or I had. (we both had some of them) We could hear a strange rrrrrrreeeeeeeeeekkk kind of noise coming from somewhere unexpected, which turned out to be the trans mount. We got SO SICK of the trans (M-21) grinding, which of course is ALWAYS a symptom of the clutch not disengaging, that we finally actually watched in detail what happened as the clutch was pushed. We discovered we could actually SEE the motor shifting toward the front on the mounts about ¼" when the clutch was pushed, which of course is nearly HALF of the total throw of the linkage. NEARLY HALF of the total available motion was being wasted in that ONE imperfection. New motor & trans mounts helped a good bit, maybe cut it in half, but didn't completely cure it.

I HATE linkage clutch systems. I will NEVER go back to that crap. As I mentioned in another thread about something related to this, in about 86 I found a wrecked 84 in the buzzard nest, and pried the whole BH, pedals, and hydraulics out from under the guardian, and swapped it into my 83. It was SO MUCH BETTER IN EVERY WAY than the old crap, I was ASTOUNDED. I kept the old crappy linkage sitting around for acoupla years afterwards but finally threw it in the trash during a garage cleanup in maybe early 90s or so. Haven't EVER regretted it a single minute.

The shifter in a T-5 car is rotated back the other way to put it in the same place as it ever was. Not changed. The problem that the rotation is designed to solve, is the push rod end of the fork, needing to go through the gas pedal, in the "usual" orientation.

 

If you'd like to see pictures of every part in our automatic transmission, here ya go

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tran...ent-700r4.html

 

Good info, Sofa! I agree, hydraulic all the way.

 

!st off, this entire response is in the wrong thread. I specifically started my own, to get opinions on this tranny tilt, and mech. linkage. No matter, at least it's active.

The info above, concerning the tranny tilt, made me knock the cobwebs off my 84,and get back under it, to see the floor pan. And it now makes sense about the clearance for the clutch fork. It appears the designers of the time, were more interested in cutting down the size of the undercarriage, with no thought of proper clutch linkage geometry. At that time, the industry wasn't into the performance car market anymore, like it had been from late 50s, to early 70s, and the stick shift was a dying breed. (Even worse today). And once again, I'm not familiar with these "new to me" 3rd gens, and their idiosyncrasies, and can see if a mech. link were to be utilized, with the BH hole in its "normal" location, alterations will have-ta be made. Thanks for making the point. I can see why taking the easy way out, with an elaborate hyd. system, is preferred. And if it comes down to it, as a last resort, I guess there's a hyd. aftermarket system, that doesn't even require a fork, fluid goes straight to the TOB.

As for badgering the "old" mech. systems, they've worked perfectly since the beginning of automotive inception, and continue to work reliably today. In the days when the 4 speeds reigned, in drag racing, with torquey motors and slicks, there were minor tweaks made to the car, to keep the clutch linkage aligned. And on the street, they rarely had any issues. It wasn't rocket science. And once in place, you didn't need to worry about leaks, kinked lines, fluid levels, ect. Course, there was a lot more room under the cars to work with back then, which actually made the hobby..."fun". Different times, different opinions.. It all comes down to what we're use to. Sorry to the OP for the thread drift.

 

And throwing things at your food as it ran by so that it slowed down enough for you to take a bite worked for MILLIONS of years. Grocery stores have been around for... what... 150 years or something? Does your "argument" (since what you said is not logical, I'm using the word VERY loosely) mean we shouldn't buy food at grocery stores?

Just in the automotive field, solid front axles with kingpins, flathead in-line 6-cyls, and drum brakes, just to name a few, won World War 2. Does that mean that everything that has come along since, is unnecessary or "not good" in some way? Again, if your "argument" had logic, that would be the correct conclusion that it would lead to.

Mech clutch linkages, especially as installed in THESE cars, have no place. They are OBSOLETE GARBAGE with all manner of shortcomings, imperfections, and failure points. Time to move on.

I can't tell you how many times progress has been defeated by "we've always done it this way, you telling us we've been doing it wrong for the last 50 years?" kind of STUPIDITY. Just in my own personal "career" (or lack thereof).

Or, you can just be a DINOSAUR, and attempt to ignore the asteroid. Not my problem. Doesn't make it "good advice" to give to someone else though.

 

Oh my gosh, I'm almost in tears laughing

 

LOL, Sofaman, you "are" passionate, when it comes to your own opinion, aren't ya. I get it. You're probably of the "under 40 crowd", that believe anything older than 10 yrs is prehistoric. (even tho it's tried and proven). And you've probably never even driven a car with a Z-bar, but knew of a friends, friends fathers dog who drove, and had a problem, so "all" mechanical links are bad. That's OK, you can have that thought. So far, we still have "kinda" a free country, and you're entitled to your own opinion. Doesn't make it right, but you can still have it.

 

Sofa? Of the "under 40 crowd" ????? Shirley you can't be serious, the guy was Joseph's best man when he married Mary, for Christ's sake!!!!!


And before ya say it, YES I know I misspelled "Surely", see the movie "Airplane" for reference.

PS, Thank You, a good laugh is a great way to begin the day..........

 

This made me chuckle. Bravo.

 

LOL. I didn't even pick up on the "Shirley" quote, but know the movie is a classic, right up there with Young Frankenstein. I still think in the movie Airplane, the best scene is the "auto-pilot".
(By the way, is the OP still involved in this thread?)

 

Sofa might pre-date cars, dude.
I honestly can't remember a time when sofa was wrong. He's literally one of the smartest people ever on this forum.

 

Well, I guess that being said, we're not suppose to have an opinion. I stand corrected.

 

never had auto thought about it once but i think i was high at the time...thinking about it again im getting to old for this horse $#!&

 

Come on now, don't be a cry baby about it.