
Originally Posted by
Kyle
Horsepower cannot break a clutch because horsepower is defined as work over time.
Torque can, along with a multitude of other human related events.
@ny5speed can confirm an FX500 in a "lowly, under-powered VVL N/A" engine.
Both of my lowly, underpowered, NA VVLs are running fx500s. The reasons I will continue to recommend this clutch to anyone who'll listen are basically:
Its a clutch that will take anything that you're likely to throw at it at any power level that
most of us are likely to be messing around with.
CM uses a slightly different fulcrum point on the pressure plate to provide excellent clamping force while maintaining a stock-like pedal effort (actually lighter than the JWT PP I took out). This is in stark contrast to the ACT Extreme PP and six puck unsprung setup that I had in the b13 many moons ago. I think the ACT setup was what makes people think that this is too much clutch for a lower powered or daily driven car. The ACT chattered badly, had very heavy pedal effort which helped speed along clutch cable failure, and, worst of all, made the car less enjoyable to drive. The FX500 does not behave this way.
Regardless of actual TQ load, I do not like sprung disks in applications that that will constantly see high rpm engagement.
Great clutch, great feel, reasonable price, ready to be abused for years to come.
now... the issue of overclutching could be argued for turbo cars or other high tq setups running b13/b14 trannies with that glass third gear. I that case you might want a lightert clutch that will slip some instead of just shearing teeth off... but that is another issue.