First, thanks to all who replied to my original question... I had to put the project on hold for a while due to work but I did get the transmission removed and the new clutch installed, as well as some other work done.... it turned out that I had removed the starter *motor* and not the entire starter assembly - so those bolts were still holding the tranny in. Duh.

I guess this might turn into my build thread as I have another question...

I now have a nice "grabby" clutch, and a few other mods (8 lb fly, no cat, opened up air intake, new exhaust header, etc.) and it seems like I have a more engine power. But, it feels like it is being "wasted". The engine can spin up very fast but I wonder if taller gears would make for better acceleration? It just feels like 2nd and 3rd gear don't pull as much as they *could*?

SO, I've studied the various CRX math sites and gear ratio's and it seems to me that very simple upgrade would be to use an HF tranny, right? Wouldn't it simply "go faster" because of it's taller gears and FD?

Is it really that simple? What is the trade off? Surely this has been tried...

Again, thanks!

************************************************** ***


First time I've tried replacing a clutch.

90 CRX Si - D16a6 & L3 tranny (all stock as far as I know).

I have followed the lists of tasks from a couple of the FAQ entries...

But, I cannot get the transmission to seperate from the engine.

Everything is apart: 5 bell housing bolts, 3 tran mounts, exhaust mount, dust cover bolts, starter removed, speedo cable, reverse switch, axles are out, etc.

I think I've got everything, but I just cannot pry it apart from the engine block.

Any suggestions?

Do I need to remove the shift linkage? None of the FAQs say this.

Is there a bolt I've likely missed?

Thanks, all, for the help!

 

The dowel pins that are used as a guide can be a pain sometimes. The fit is rather tight and can be tough to pry apart.
As far as all the bolts removed.. I think you got them all?

 

shift linkage does need to be removed.
its its auto, there is cables, if its manual, there is a pin you have to pop out and the linkage slides backward.

 

Shift linkage needs to be removed but the transmission should still break loose of the engine regardless. Assuming the shift linkage is like a B-series, there's the pin, as mentioned above, as well as one bolt. But by the sounds of it, there is a bolt still in there.

One more thing. If it's similar to a B-series in an EF chassis, you'll need to lower the engine slightly so that you have clearance to pull the tranny off the engine and clear the input shaft and clutch and everything else in there.

 

Don't have to mess with that pin. Unbolt the linkage at the bottom of the shifter for ease of removal.

 

Have you tried lowering the motor on that side a little. Also you can try grabbing it where the clutch cable connects and pull that and sometimes it will pop free

 

First, thanks to all who replied to my original question... I had to put the project on hold for a while due to work but I did get the transmission removed and the new clutch installed, as well as some other work done.... it turned out that I had removed the starter *motor* and not the entire starter assembly - so those bolts were still holding the tranny in. Duh.

I guess this might turn into my build thread as I have another question...

I now have a nice "grabby" clutch, and a few other mods (8 lb fly, no cat, opened up air intake, new exhaust header, etc.) and it seems like I have a more engine power. But, it feels like it is being "wasted". The engine can spin up very fast but I wonder if taller gears would make for better acceleration? It just feels like 2nd and 3rd gear don't pull as much as they *could*?

SO, I've studied the various CRX math sites and gear ratio's and it seems to me that very simple upgrade would be to use an HF tranny, right? Wouldn't it simply "go faster" because of it's taller gears and FD?

Is it really that simple? What is the trade off? Surely this has been tried...

Again, thanks!

 

Taller gears never make for better acceleration, the opposite in fact. They make for a higher possible top speed at the expense of acceleration, while shorter gears make for better acceleration, but a lower possible top speed.

 

Ok, but I'm really not groking this...

If I'm getting more tire revolutions (per engine turn) due to taller gears doesn't that translate into better acceleration _as well as_ better top speed? Why not?

I look at the math - but I'm not sure how to translate into "how it drives".

Right now, with my stock SI tran, it *feels* like my engine can spin up "too easy" - at least in 2nd and 3rd gears. Like it could be doing more to the wheels? Not sure how to explain it... and maybe there's another problem like LSD or something I'm not getting?

 

With taller gears, the engine has to work harder to get the same amount of revolutions of wheel.

Think of it like this: with taller gears, your 2nd and 3rd gears would be more like your 4th and 5th. Which accelerates quicker, your 2nd and 3rd, or 4th and 5th?

 

I understand what you are saying...

But I'm finding that when I drive it I'm almost always ignoring 1st gear. If I waste time in first gear it takes longer to get to top speed.

If I start out in second gear I can get up to speed faster... the pull feels stronger and it's one less shift. (maybe I've got more power going on than I realize??)

SO, if I've done the math right (been reading Bensebuilt and some other stuff), installing an HF tran would be the same as throwing away 1st gear on my SI tran and moving the rest of the gears down one, and then having a taller 5th gear... right?

Actually, the math looks pretty good for a CA HF (3.25 final drive) - kinda splits the difference between stock SI (4.25 FD) and stock HF (2.95 FD).

Or, maybe there's such a thing as a replacement FD for the L3 tran that's in the 3-3.5 range? Gonna start searching now...

Surely someone has actually *tried it*, right? Seems like a simple upgrade...