If my theory is correct(and i am by no means an expert):
1.The M/C will displace a certain amount of fluid,say 5ml(no idea how much,just a figure),This will move move the Slave cylinder piston a certain distance(say 2mm).It has no choice,the fluid has to go somewhere,if it can't move the pisron,you end up with a solid lever,like your brakes.
2.The 2mm movement of the piston must move the rod the same distance.If it takes a movement of 2.1mm to completely disengage the clutch,then it it won't.
3.Therefore i would say your original theory of a spacer between the push rod and Slave piston would work.This would mean you you are effectively lengthening the rod,which in turns means that the rod will move the clutch further apart.
4. This of course is based on the slave piston returning all the way back,otherwise your extra will be just taken up by the fluid returning back to the reservoir.
I would push the piston ALL the way back into the cylinder,until it is solid,then insert a shim(s) until you have no freeplay between the rod and the piston.Therefore you are guaranteed that ALL the movement of the fluid is transferred to the piston and then to the rod.If when you put the slave cylinder back on it starts to push the rod and separate the clutch,you have too many shims.
Now this is just a pie in the sky theory i have written as i sit here.There are no doubt more qualified people on here(Marvin?Brad?Mr R.?),that can pull holes in this theory,but it sounds right to me!!
brutushullie wroteok, wrong theory and got back to the dealer.. Got a longer pushing rod (335mm) and removed the bushing in the mpl-slave cylinder. Got the stack on the right thickness. But the problem seems to be that the slave cylinder activates the rod for approx 1,5mm. To short I believe. The answer could be a clutchhandle to activate it a bit more. Should need some more activation between 0,5 and 1 mm. An adjustable handle could solve te problem.. Any suggestions..?
