Search results

Let me explain the graph a bit more. The blue lines (the outlier) represent testing we did on a brand new Jeep on the showroom floor. The gray and green are after 21K and 62K miles, respectively. Both were fair-weather cars btw. The difference between the down stroke and up stroke is friction...

17-19lbs is really light for a clutch pedal, but the return stroke concerns me more. We have measured less than 2 lbs on the return stroke pushing against your foot which is hardly enough to feel. See tests from 3 different Jeeps:

There are a lot of cars that would have exploding clutches if allowed to slip long enough. You can find videos of them on the internet. Could it be prevented by design? IMHO, absolutely. Should 100% clutch explosion prevention be a design requirement for vehicle manufacturers? One would think...

Don't bother. The dual-mass has nothing to do with the drivability. I haven't measured it, but less just say there is 20 degrees of rotation of damping in the flywheel, or 5% of one revolution. As you engage the clutch at 1500 rpm (for example), which is 25 rev/second, to bottom out 20 degrees...

I posted this reply to a similar comment on the JLWranglerforums: It isn't as fragile as you would think. After our testing and analysis, what's interesting is the same design isn't a common grenade on other vehicles that make a lot more power. Obviously the clamp load isn't the same on those...

Did they supply part numbers for what replaced the original clutch parts?

I think you misunderstand. The total inertia of the flywheel and clutch is what prevents stalling, which is reduced on the JL/JT compared to the JK (and ACT of course). The engine characteristics don't change if it is single mass or dual mass. What changes is downstream of the engine, with the...

I know what you mean but it's in the tuning. I have a TJ with the 4.0 and a JKUR (similar 3.6). It seems like the TJ is tuned so that it feeds air/fuel more aggressively to prevent stalling than the JT/JL/JK. The TJ is more like a tractor. Of course it also doesn't rev like my JK.

Sounds like they aren’t interested. It’s pretty straight forward. We (ACT) have a detailed install video, and I can send you additional tips. It should be a 6 hour job according to All-data as I recall.

The dual mass flywheel has nothing to do with the stop-start or feature or economy. It is designed to put the torsional damping further upstream (rather than in the clutch disc) which reduces the chance of gear noise and lightens the load on the synchronizers. This is beneficial in vehicles with...

No, the reduced inertia is not to help the start/stop system. Cylinder compression far outweighs flywheel inertia when it comes to loads on the starter. I did a complete breakdown of the JT/JL clutch in another thread and explained the components here...

There certainly have been some reported on the "Jeep Clutch Recall" Facebook page, but mostly reports of being denied. The first accepted reimbursement I saw was from an attorney Jeep owner, but I am sure that had nothing to do with it (sarcasm).

We all see discrepancies between what is published, what is policy, and what is practiced.

I don't even know what the new part numbers are. After they start coming out and someone is willing to let me test it, I will gladly share the results.

Realize for legal (CYA) reasons they aren't going to admit a "defect". I expect they won't even mention any sort of improvement to the parts, since in court it could ultimately be perceived as fixing a defect. I am really interested in what the "replacement" is going to test like.

only some… For a fairly extensive explanation of the JL/JT clutch, check out:https://www.jeepgladiatorforum.com/forum/threads/jt-jl-clutch-and-flywheel-explained-by-act.68758/

For those who don't want to gamble on Jeep's "fix", here's a deal for you:

Being the end of 2022, that would have included the adapted JK hydraulics. There are a few things that could be going on. The only way to know for sure is to have the clutch parts examined and tested. We have chased similar issues over the years and found all kinds of things. For instance, I...

The difference between the JL hydraulics and JK hydraulics (what CF adapted for the JL) is the cylinder piston size. The JK hydraulics move the clutch arm further than the JL but otherwise of the same construction. By adapting the JK hydraulics CF now has enough travel to operate their clutch...

Google calculator doesn't take into account where the mass is. The 11" vs 10.4" is clutch disc size. You would need to compare the two assemblies including the pressure plate and disc for each to get an accurate value. Without testing on our inertia tester, I would just say they are comparable...