<VV> PG BELLHOUSING DIFFERENCES plus

[Frank DuVal]

So my use of steped flywheels/pressure plates/ball stud/throwout bearing 
combination on 60 to 63 engines with 60/63 bellhousings was not supposed 
to work?

Frank DuVal

BobHelt at aol.com wrote:

> 
>In a message dated 2/15/2008 6:59:59 AM US Mountain Standard Time,  
>N2VZD at aol.com writes:
>
>can  anyone tell me the real difference between early and late pg   
>bellhousings?
>if i use the early flex plate and early bellhousing it  should be close  
>enough?  or is the crank size an  issue?
>
>
>
>Hi Tim,
>Well basically the PG bellhousings follow the revisions made to the MT  
>housings. Since the MT clutches were different for the 1960-63 and 1964-69, you  
>need to separate the PG bellhousings into these two groups too.
>Then you should match the combinations of crank hub/flexplate and  
>bellhousing for either EM or LM.
> 
>The crank hubs are not easilly identified separately, but you can be pretty  
>much assured that the crank casting numbers will be a good identifier.
>The flexplates can be identified in that the LM one has a 1/8 in hole in  the 
>6-bolt circle.
>The bellhousings can be identified by their casting numbers. EM=6255599,  
>LM=3832517.
> 
>OK, the answer to your question is.......
>The main oil seal contact surface on the hub was relocated rearward by  0.070 
>in. on the LM bellhousing.
> 
>Regards,
>Bob Helt
>
>
>  
>