Demon_Dub

I really dont know the difference. Id imagine a cable tranny has cables that control gear selection but I have no idea how a hyraulic tranny works. Also for a car that will be road raced and Never daily driven which is a better choice?

My car is a shell and have nothing right now. Since cable is cheaper should I just go with that since Im starting from scratch??


Modified by Demon_Dub at 12:15 AM 9/16/2004

blackdelslo

Its reffering to the clutch mechanism, not the linkage bars or cables that shift the transmission.

Demon_Dub

Ahh, so a cable tranny uses a cable that engages/disengages the clutch while a hydraulic clutch uses hudraulic pressure? Is that correct? I have a 92 hatch with no drivetrain, which is the better or easier setup to swap in?

Colin

iTrader: (1)

your car is setup for a hydro clutch.... its easiest to just keep that setup.

Slopoke

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Demon_Dub &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ahh, so a cable tranny uses a cable that engages/disengages the clutch while a hydraulic clutch uses hudraulic pressure?</TD></TR></TABLE>

That is exactly correct.

Stick with a hydraulic tranny(what your car came with).

Demon_Dub

My car is a shell and have nothing right now. Since cable is cheaper should I just go with that since Im starting from scratch??

v4lu3s

no it will be easier to go with the hydraulic since the firewall is setup to mount the clutch master cylinder. o ne thing to rememebr is that no matter how stiff the clutch is a hydraulic setup never stretches like a cableone does.
if you wnt to go with a cable tranny get the pedal assembly from a 91 or earlier civic and hook that up, it may take some small mods to fit though.

Colin

iTrader: (1)

yup....stick with what that car is built for. It'll be easier overall.

dohcdelsol93

cable trannys are cheap, especially ls cable trannys. A hydro to cable conversion is $199, very easy installation. You can find ls cable trannys for 300-350 all day long.

hypa

FYI, cable trannies (except the cable GSR tranny) all have smaller input shafts, whereas the hydro has a larger one. That alone makes the hydro's stronger.

Colin

iTrader: (1)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by hypa &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">FYI, cable trannies (except the cable GSR tranny) all have smaller input shafts, whereas the hydro has a larger one. That alone makes the hydro's stronger.</TD></TR></TABLE>
This is partially incorrect. There are two "generations", if you will, of b series cable tranny. The ones made in 89-91 and the ones made in 92-93. The 89-91 versions have the smaller shaft. The 92-93's (not just the gsr) have the same size input shaft as the hydro trannies.

hypa

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 91IntegGS &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The 92-93's (not just the gsr) have the same size input shaft as the hydro trannies.</TD></TR></TABLE>

thanks for the clarification.


I found this out by accident, when a customers clutch disc no longer fit the tranny.

Cnote

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by dohcdelsol93 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">cable trannys are cheap, especially ls cable trannys. A hydro to cable conversion is $199, very easy installation. You can find ls cable trannys for 300-350 all day long. </TD></TR></TABLE>

for an N/A car and LS tranny is not quite the best best setup. spend the 500-600 for a GSR/B16 tranny and be much happier. Not to mention why would you want a 14 year old tranny, sometimes ppl's cheapness gets the best of them.