ACT or Centerforce

[signals34]

which do you think is a better replacement clutch/flywheel?

Sponsored

 

[JT1]

which do you think is a better replacement clutch/flywheel?

The centerforce requires you to mess with the hydraulics.

ACT doesn't.

 

[Gossamer]

OK, but does that make the CF worse? Or better?

Or, McLeod?

No idea how a hydraulic throw out bearing works or the pros and cons. Tried doing some research, all I've really found is biased, veiled advertisements.

Never needed to go to a different style of clutch, oem clutches always worked fine for me.

 

[JT1]

OK, but does that make the CF worse? Or better?

Or, McLeod?

No idea how a hydraulic throw out bearing works or the pros and cons. Tried doing some research, all I've really found is biased, veiled advertisements.

Never needed to go to a different style of clutch, oem clutches always worked fine for me.

If you are doing the work yourself, the ACT would be simpler.
If a shop is doing it, the ACT should be cheaper since all they are doing is replacing the flywheel and clutch, where the CF is flywheel clutch and slave cylinder.

I'm not sold on the hydraulic throwout bearing yet. In the old days slave cylinders were much more reliable than the hydraulic throwout bearings were, and also easier and cheaper to replace..

In the end, you have to determine what fits. When I get ready to do it, I'll research the mcleod some more, but ACT is in the lead for me right now.

 

[Gossamer]

Basically, I understand how a throw out bearing and clutch fork work, I get the concept of a hydraulic bearing but I don't understand the pros and cons.

I'm not doing the work myself. Don't have the time, equipment, room, knowledge. ... you name it. I almost bought an ACT JP6 last week, they were 30% off, but I have multiple shops around me and wanted to pick a shop first. Then the JP6 was out of stock, so no pressure for the deal now.

Right now, I don't really care much about the poor performance, i mostly just drive 8 miles round trip daily for work. I'm going to be retired by the end of the year and will finally have time to play in the woods. I want to have it changed out, with some break in, before I start hitting the trails regularly.

 

[toothirtyj]

I went with the ACT JP6 because:

- It was the simplest to install, which I did myself.
- I appreciate that it's most like a traditional clutch. No dual friction gimmicks, no dual mass gimmicks, no new hydraulic gimmicks. My Jeep is not a hot rod so I want simplicity and reliability.
- The support and explanation from ACT on this forum has been outstanding and something I, personally, haven't noticed from other manufacturers before

Traditional flywheel, traditional clutch, traditional pressure plate, traditional throw out bearing... boom. done.

I finally look forward to driving my Jeep which mainly consists of Indiana city/highway driving with vacation trips to east coast beaches and Rocky Mountain trails.

 

[OldGuyNewJeep]

K.I.S.S. - keep it simple, stupid! The stellar videos that the owner of ACT posted on our forum demonstrate how they adhere to that rule. Those videos sold me, for sure.

I don’t doubt that the CFII is also good. Hell, ACT commented as much in the thread with the videos. However, messing with hydraulics breaks the KISS rule. Not to mention the added cost (probably 50% more expensive than ACT when you factor in shop time). Oh, and what happens if your master or slave fail? Can’t just run over to the parts desk…

McLeod - Hydraulic bearing? What? Why? With my luck it would start leaking after a week. I’m definitely not sold on that idea. At the very least, I would not want to be an early adopter. Again, KISS. It’s a Jeep, not a space shuttle.

 

[Gregj]

However, messing with hydraulics breaks the KISS rule. Not to mention the added cost (probably 50% more expensive than ACT when you factor in shop time). Oh, and what happens if your master or slave fail? Can’t just run over to the parts desk…

They are standard JK parts, so easy to source.
But I agree ACT is far simpler.
Gregj

 

[mudpup]

Love my CF II and well worth the mod from the get-go imo.
Swapped mine out with only 5k miles on the factory clutch.
Light flywheel from the factory sucks… sure you can make do but it still sucks.

 

[Chris D]

CFII with standard throwout bearing is the same install as the ACT. I suspect going with a solid flywheel regardless of the brand will be effectively equivalent in performance for 98% of the folks out there. That 24" extension was necessary for the top bolts on the trans to get it off. I can say, the solid flywheel has an amazing improvement in performance, especially at lower RPMS. Truly don't know WTF those folks in Auburn Hills were thinking to make the clutch complex. I may go with the ACT on the next Jeep just to compare them. Disclaimer: I installed the CFII with the help of a 17 yr old.

 

[signals34]

thanks.....looks like i'm leaning towards the ACT...i'm installing it myself, keep it simple

 

[Chris D]

Get a long extension 24" minimum. I did it without pulling the TC and linkage. Might save a couple of pounds to drain the fluids beforehand. Would not recommend switching the master cyl. Take your time and document. A helper is very useful.

 

[LatteSipper]

I went with the ACT JP6 because:

- It was the simplest to install, which I did myself.
- I appreciate that it's most like a traditional clutch. No dual friction gimmicks, no dual mass gimmicks, no new hydraulic gimmicks. My Jeep is not a hot rod so I want simplicity and reliability.
- The support and explanation from ACT on this forum has been outstanding and something I, personally, haven't noticed from other manufacturers before

Traditional flywheel, traditional clutch, traditional pressure plate, traditional throw out bearing... boom. done.

I finally look forward to driving my Jeep which mainly consists of Indiana city/highway driving with vacation trips to east coast beaches and Rocky Mountain trails.

+1, same reasons here, except not installing myself.

Sponsored