I'm putting a 425 and a M21 in an engineless '66 442 I bought a couple years ago. It'll have a 3.55 rear; its what I have on hand. The car was originally a Jetaway version with column shift. I've been reading up on clutch linkages and it boils down to should I use the Parts Place repro mechanical clutch linkage for A bodies or should I use one of the hydraulic clutch linkage setups? I already have a Centerforce clutch/pressure plate, a factory 400/425 flywheel and a BOP bellhousing. I also have a two pedal setup I believe is out of a '66 GTO. So which should it be? Repro mechanical or hydraulic? The race car mechanic who rebuilt my Muncie said you can't shift as fast with a hydraulic setup as with mechanical however thats not real important to me. I drove a retired NASCAR stocker at one of those fantasy track days and it had a Jerico 4 speed and hydraulic setup; I liked how it felt. Looking for people who have personal knowledge.

 

I used original parts that cleaned up pretty well.
There are some subtle differences between original and repo. that I thought made a difference. Stronger for one thing.
In my '72 the mini starter did not have a place to hook the return spring on. I had to fabricate something. that was my most troubling issue.
Also, It was much easier to get at the linkage area with the inner wheel well removed.
I searched on the hydraulic setups and some folks were happy with the outcome and some were not. Cheaper ones had more trouble.
Most agree it's more difficult to install than the original mechanical design.

Good luck,

George

 

I'm sure you know that the frame bracket for the equalizer bar is welded on the 64-67 cars. In any case, a hydraulic clutch linkage gets the equalizer and rods out of the way of headers, which is always helpful. I've got a factory hydraulic clutch in my 86 Chevy truck with no issues (other than when the cylinder needed to be replaced due to age).