[Cruiser124]

Is this normal movement for a bmw throw out bearing? Seems like it could rattle, maybe not.

Also bearing has two opposing sides stamped with a diamond, and other sides do not. How should i install on the fork? Thanks!

[850CSi]

Bumping this because I have the same question. Anyone?

[Cruiser124]

Originally Posted by 850CSi

Bumping this because I have the same question. Anyone?

Normal

[850CSi]

Originally Posted by Cruiser124

Normal

Thanks! any idea re his question about the bearing's orientation in the fork? Like the one in the video, my bearing has two sides stamped with a diamond shape. Which way did you wind up installing it?

It appears to me that the orientation affects how far the bearing protrudes from the fork, and I'm seeing posts suggesting that one configuration is meant for euro cars vs another for US vehicles.

[850CSi]

Alright, just to close the loop on this in case it benefits anyone else. I wound up choosing the orientation with the diamonds horizontal. Basically, I compared the fork/bearing to my old one and found that the dimensions were much closer that way. And every picture I could find of the throwout bearing/fork seemed to have them in that orientation.

I then found some documentation that appears to back up that intuition, see attached.

[Brian86]

Originally Posted by 850CSi

Alright, just to close the loop on this in case it benefits anyone else. I wound up choosing the orientation with the diamonds horizontal. Basically, I compared the fork/bearing to my old one and found that the dimensions were much closer that way. And every picture I could find of the throwout bearing/fork seemed to have them in that orientation.

I then found some documentation that appears to back up that intuition, see attached.

For reference, just this past week I put a new clutch into my '06 N52. The factory TO has a different construction. There is only a single set of lands.

Measuring from the rotating face of the bearing to the rocker lands is 25mm, which roughly corresponds to the 'lower' 7mm position on the diagram above.

However the factory pivot arm/TO has a different configuration as well. The factory pivot arm has the rocking radius feature and the TO has flat lands. The new LUK assembly is the opposite. Radius rocker on the TO and with a flat pivot arm. This makes it somewhat difficult to measure apples-to-apples.

This thread popped up, literally, at the same time I was pushing the transmission on the car (working on jackstands, no lift) and I didn't see it until after the gearbox was on so it's put me into a mild state of despondency.

I installed mine in the 'high' position. I wasn't aware there were two sets of lands on the TO, and the higher ones, being more prominent were the ones I used. Didn't even notice the other set, although I do remember seeing the diamond.

I feel like that ought to be something printed on a sheet of paper LUK should include with the kit.

I'm waiting the fed-ex man to bring a replacement roll pin for the shift linkage in order to finish putting the car together. Had to perform a little 'destructive disassembly' to get it apart.

The clutch 'feels' normal. Also I was able to fully seat the slave cylinder by hand so I don't think the 'high' position is putting any static pressure on the PP. As long as the slave cylinder isn't bottomed out, it'll find it's natural home position.

I'll update next week to to let you know if the clutch is slipping.


*ninjaedit


Just went back out to the garage to test the clutch again. As I mentioned above it feels perfectly normal. The LUK is considerably lighter than the factory PP that came out, but I expect that with a luk. I'm not sure if that is a characteristic of luk clutches, or do old clutches simply get heaver as time passes due to work-hardening in the springs. My old one had 288k, so it's certainly been worked.

(as a side note, the friction disk was probably only 50% or 60% worn. I bet it had another 200k miles on it. The DM flywheel on the other hand was a bomb with a lit fuse)

The clutch fully releases. Action/engagement also feels like it's in more-or-less the same spot as the old one. Approximately 1/3 off the floor is where the grab/release point is when I reach through the center console and turn the transmission output shaft.

I'm feeling confident enough to stop losing sleep over it. Seems like it doesn't matter which way the TO is installed, at least on an N52. It's possible on the N43, N45, N46 engines that specify the high position that the slave cylinder might pop out of it's bore if installed incorrectly with the 'low' lands. However I don't know for sure.

[Brian86]

So, closing the loop, the wagon is back on the road and runs just as it should. I double checked the slave cylinder installation to make sure it wasn't bottoming out. I can confirm that installing the TO in the incorrect 'high' position doesn't matter on an n52. Slave cylinder has adequate travel. Makes no difference in pedal action position.

The new light clutch is very pleasant. The old one had as much weight as an international box truck with a spicer gearbox I drove ages ago. My daily driver BMW shouldn't have been fatiguing my left leg when stuck in traffic or on a giving it a bit of a flogging.

[850CSi]

Good stuff, thanks for the follow up.

I don't think my clutch disc or pressure plate were worn, either. I just had a big hole in my flywheel.

I still have some driveline vibration under acceleration. But hard to tell how much, because I'm trying to go easy on the new clutch for the first few hundred or so miles.

[Michal]

Just changing my clutch experiencing the same problem having EU e90 330i N52.
Car is originally from Germany beeing driven in Europe for the whole time.
The correct orientation is the SHORT position - just compared it with old EOM dismounted from my car.