A few posts mention slipping clutches with tuned bikes making more power than stock, or abused clutches at the drag strip. This doesn't mean they're weak from the factory on a stock ZX14R, but when you mod for higher horsepower, you should always do the supporting mods other parts like the brakes, clutch....or melted rear tires...haha. While I haven't raced my 14R at the strip (yet), it's not what I would call "babied"...

What do you think of these pics of my clutch:

IDK all them thar parts in thar but looks to me like the outer plate (the one closest to the clutch cover) is settled in a couple millimeters deeper than mine. From what I see, I'd say your stack is worn quite a bit. Hub?

You probably read my thread when I had clutch slippage. It was a lever. I was told my clutch stack looked perfectly normal from the oil filler hole view.

I can't post pic but here's the link. Go ahead and copy and post if you want.

http://s461.photobucket.com/user/Rookzx/media/2008%20ZX-14/Engine/Lower%20Engine/Clutch/Clutch%20Inspection/cluchoilfilhol5-1.jpg.html?sort=3&o=1

* Last updated by: Rook on 3/31/2015 @ 11:50 AM *

I'll post Rooks pic here, for reference:

I bought my bike with about 1,500 miles on it (In great shape overall, but I didn't look at the clutch plates through the oil fill hole like this when I first bought it). I installed ASV shorty levers around 3,500 miles or so. I only noticed it slipping 2 or maybe 3 times under HARD acceleration at speed (not drag launches). I used the ASV levers until I stored it for the winter, so about November 2014 at about 5,500 miles. Just this spring I put the stock levers back on since I have read about aftermarket levers sometimes causing the slipping issues.

I ordered the EBC CSK23 clutch springs that are supposed to be 10% stiffer than stock. I will install them when they arrive. My other mods are listed in my sig. Best dyno pull was ~192hp RWHP SAE at 1,500' elevation on a warm day.

My fear is that I don't want to just band-aid the problem by throwing stiffer springs at it, if the clutch is really worn out I want to replace it and fix it the right way.

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 3/31/2015 @ 1:45 PM *

Mine is in the middle of those two photos with 10,600 on the clock. Smooth as glass, N is effortless.

I wonder if we can get Maverick to chime in and offer his expertise, are we looking at something that is even an accurate method of comparison? Are all clutches when viewed through the oil hole, going to look the same when brand new? How does a new clutch look like compared to either mine or Rooks photos above? What if the 'tangs' on the basket assembly holding the plates have a tolerance on their length, and our clutches could be identical but the tang length varies....

Does anyone have a brand new off the showroom floor bike that would take a picture of this for us? Or anyone else willing to go to a Kawasaki dealership and take a pic. Stock lever in place, fully released not being held in.

I also neglected to mention that I have a Spiegler SS clutch line (and brake lines) that I have installed and bled. Is there any way I could have messed that up and caused some slipping? It should be exactly the same procedure as bleeding brakes...remove all air bubbles (no matter how small) from the system until adequate lever pressure is attained. I happen to have a force gauge (like a fish-scale but pushing). With a stock lever, stock clutch & springs, braided Stainless Steel clutch line (no line expansion), measured from the ball end of the lever on full lever travel until it nearly touches the handlebar = 13 lbs of force. I will post a photo to show this later, and measure again once I install the EBC springs.

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 4/1/2015 @ 11:22 AM *

It for sure takes more force with the EBC springs. Stop and go traffic will have my left hand screaming uncle in a short period of time. Stock springs were not an issue here.

If I recall, the plate sticks out ever so much out as like Rooks. So the breakout is between 53.52 - 54.52 mm. Say the fork tang from a fresh bike on the floor tang and this pressure plate looks way more than a mill and a half so to me it's played technically, but does it slip? And once it slips, no way home sort of speak.

This is what I was talking about earlier (3 posts up). I accidently pushed the lever to the bar while taking the picture if you notice it reads 15lbs , the actual force required to pull the lever to the bar (Before it actually makes contact) is exactly 13lbs of force when measured this way:

I also just picked up my EBC CSK23 springs. Online it states that they're 10% stiffer than stock, but the retail packaging says 15% stiffer than stock. Well which one is it??? Brock's Performance said the OEM ZX14R springs are 45lbs each and 270lbs for the asssembly. So these EBC springs are either 49.5lbs or 51.75lbs each. Multiply by 6 springs in the clutch assembly and its 297lbs or 310.5lbs total.

Bradley427, Can you please post the measurement of the force required to pull the clutch lever afterwards?

In general, how exactly can you tell if the clutch is worn out by looking through the oil filler hole? Is there really that much material on the friction plates to be able to visually see a different? This method obviously won't allow you to check for burned or warped plates, not sure if that's more of a problem then worn out friction plates.

The bag nomenclature is "one size fits all".

See where it says, "steel coil or diaphragm spring".

I would go by the posted literature for your particular fitment.

Nightmare - I'm not sure whether the "look thru the oil hole" method has any merit....but it's pretty interesting that our bikes are so different. Actually, Rook's is a first gen... I never thought of that before. Maybe that's got a little to do with it? (mine's a 14R) Anyway, I took the bike apart about an hour ago to install the EBC springs and take a look at my plates. With the EBC springs installed, I used the same push-gauge and measured the lever pressure. It is EXACTLY the same as before. I tested over a dozen times, at various angles and every time it yielded 13lbs of force. That tester is very sensitive and will pick up even a few ounces of extra force. 13lbs every time with the OEM spring AND the EBC springs. Feels exactly the same in the hand too, and I just got back from a 140-mile ride before doing this swap.

On to the plates, once I got the pressure plate off and the outer-most fiber plate, the steel underneath was WICKED blue... All the plates came out fine, nothing fought me to stay in the basket. The next several steels are clearly worn by the fibers revealing a different shade of gray/blue than the teeth that aren't being contacted by anything. Let me know what you guys think...

OEM spring on left side.....EBC CSK23 spring on right side

First steel plate (outer-most steel in basket)

Second plate in from the outside

Third plate in from the outside

Fourth plate in from the outside (I had seen enough, assuming I need a new clutch, so I stopped here)

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 4/5/2015 @ 8:40 PM *

Noticed how each steel's position was having the 'cut side facing you' upon disassembly? Note that and reassemble the same. Take all steels and lay all the cuts in one direct, and then place them on your palm all stacked like pancakes. Line them up so they look like a pack of playing cards coming out of the box. Look thru them [on the outside] as in a warp or an air gap is the search. Swap the plates so the bottom and top are now shuffled in with the pack. Where are we?

Burn means diddly as long as the steels remain flat. If I saw the steel material begin to snowball off its own finish, still called that plate straight but finished anyway. Concave/convex it will not have contact or raises the friction plate, if not cut a line/gouge in the fiber.

So all you do now is measure 54.2 mm (2.13 in) when reassembled, meaning, from the back of the first plate entered; to the last plate you installed and the back of that plate or the plate edge facing you is the 'stack.' If you are under that range, replace all frictions and steels. If you have 55mm say, lots left to go meaning. If you are at 54.2mm then that says dialed in; all you did was change springs and looked at cooked plates still within spec.

* Last updated by: Hub on 4/5/2015 @ 9:12 PM *

So I should take all the plates out and separate the steels and fibers, then inspect the steels for even the slightest amount of warp?

Is it a good idea to shuffle the steels into a different position than when they came out? Perhaps it would get that blue outer steel into a new position to establish a different wear pattern or reduce the load on it.

And when I get the micrometer out, I'm measuring the "Stack Height" which is simply all the fiber & steel plates......stacked together? (Measure it outside the bike entirely, no other parts besides plates necessary?)

I should separate the steels and fibers, then inspect the steels for even the slightest amount of warp?

Perhaps it would get that blue outer steel into a new position to establish a different wear pattern or reduce the load on it.

I'm measuring the "Stack Height" which is simply all the fiber & steel plates......stacked together?

(Measure it outside the bike entirely, no other parts besides plates necessary?)

Hub - I will tear it back open tonight and fully disassemble for inspection. I'll do the pancake test stacking all the steels together and look for the sunlight to shine through. For the stack height measurement, I read another thread that the guy couldn't get a caliper or micrometer into the crankcase to measure it on the bike, so he had to remove the "Stack" and measure it outside the bike on the bench. I'll try both ways with my micrometer at home. When measuring the overall stack height does it include the friction 'pads' on the outer two discs? For example, if I shuffled the pack to have a steel plate on both ends for ease of measuring, it would include the 'pads' on EVERY SINGLE friction disc including those that were on the ends when installed in the bike. There was a long thread about this, someone was measuring to the tangs of the outer friction discs but leaving out the outermost pads on both fiber discs (Incorrect I believe was the conclusion on that thread).

I ordered the Factory Pro EVO shift star kit which I'll throw in while I'm in the engine, and an OEM clutch cover gasket in case I destroy the one that's on it now. I also ordered the Brocks deluxe clutch spring kit with all the spacers since I didn't notice as much difference with the EBC springs pressure, and the Brocks are fully adjustable to let me dial in as much pressure as my left hand can manage.

Wait up. Are we slipping at higher rpm? Can we catch N without an ankle brace after finding it? Are we holding in clutch and the bike drags up to the car's bumper in front of you and now the back tire begins to churn? That's clutch slip and warped plates.

Like I said, those hot spots are just that. I cooked a brand new plate with a torch, dropped it in cold water, blued the plate, more dips, etc. Placed it right back on a precision surface plate and it read the same as if new.

You can do one of 2 things. Let it ride and order everything new along with the shift star. That's only if you [cannot] catch N, know the steels were installed all [in one direction are the cut sides], that, short of wasting a friction and it flings all that burnt crap onto the big clutch outer, in the engine, floats with the oil, sucks up the pump... You do not want it to get to that point [is a friction] plate burnt and decomposed. It takes just one to be out of spec it's that tight a clearance pack/stack.

2013 Kawasaki NINJA ZX-14R ABS (ZX1400FDF) Clutch | CyclePartsNation Kawasaki Parts Nation

If I have an assembled clutch; I want to take safety wire and run it down the groove of the clutch outer (13095) and touch (13087) or the clutch center's face. That is the back of the first friction (13088A). This is adding that pad and its distance to the plate its boned to. So the measurement of the pack begins you might say; on the clutch center's machined surface. It starts and ends at (13187) or the pressure plate's smooth face is the end of the wire you now snip or scribe a mark on the wire. Where is that length from end to end of the plate's pads? Are we 54mm or less? .2 is added, but think 53 is a huge mm difference we wear out a pad face.

See how we have to add pad after pad face divided by each pad to pad to 1 mm out of range we add up the wear of the pack? This is the pack's 'average' wear point. So you are pushing your luck at 54 is lose the .2, then a mm more? I mean, we can wear that pack out as long as we have pad to pad, not disc on disc. But between a cushion to bite down on, we can wear it out till it slips. Say this is more a blueprinted number wink-wink... We keep inspecting for material off the frictions... wink-wink... no slip, catch N like right now is wear it out till it first slips. Call it; pleasantly worn out; no material burned off; but sitting caked on the sump pan; all gray matter looking.

Because think about it, that pad wears down, that is still floating in the oil if not dropping onto the sump after the float; it keeps wearing on the initial release from first gear mostly, right? As if saying I hardly use my brakes but where is the pad material then? Same kind of float in the air is float in the oil. See that given? That's normal internal wear, but to burn it out into a black carbon soot? Bad boy/girl!

Same as saying I am going to, [did you see that pressure tool on the clutch lever?] I want to take all my frictions and steels, run it in a vice and set 13 pounds of spring pressure on the plates is the squeeze-down. Where is my outside distance against my running clearance or thickness in mm/inch of all my plates? This is why the stack is measure with the springs and everything squeezed down. I check my stack from the [outside edges] of [all] the plates [squeezed] in the vice.

See my wire length measured in the spring set?
See my pack measured like spring pressure was a vice showing the same effect?
See why my packing is different from a non-slipper clutch is the first year runs a pack limit of 53.52 to 54.52mm.
See my loophole I have a mm to play with and oops, the slipper is not going to ramp right now but moves up the ramp some and then unloads.
See my reading in between the lines of a non and slipper pack read in mm?
See my conclusion is I want that blueprint to be ramp-less or having a hair-trigger is my slipper engaged. It sure it right there at the ready = Blueprinted.

I read another thread that the guy couldn't get a caliper or micrometer into the crankcase to measure it on the bike, so he had to remove the "Stack" and measure it outside the bike on the bench.

Neutral is normal to find on my ZX14R. No harder or easier than any other sportbike I've owned. I rarely miss it and make a 1-2 shift or 2-1 shift. I can typically just nudge it into N at will. The bike does NOT creep forward with the clutch pulled in, like at a stoplight in 1st gear holding the clutch...I can walk the bike backwards with my feet no problem (other than my short legs). The shift star I ordered is supposed to improve shift feel overall (Not just neutral), and the arm in the kit has a micro-bearing end to reduce friction against the star body. I agree it's largely unnecessary and prohibitively expensive at $158, but since we're here and I'm working inside the engine I figured I would give it a shot.

Also, once I receive and install the Brocks clutch mod it will disable the slipper clutch portion with that little black washer it comes with HERE.

I have a service manual at home, but I didn't see it reference the overall stack height on the 2012+ ZX14R, it only specs the minimum thicknesses on each individual plate in the assembly. Measure each fiber one-by-one, and each steel one-by-one.

The thread I mentioned was here on this very site. LINK:
http://zx14ninjaforum.com/messages.cfm?threadid=7607BF6C-D56B-84E2-1AF70DCCB6BDE651&page=1

I guess I missed that one. I didn't read it, so it's more like we tag-team this out if you like. Like I said, as long as your clutch is not acting up, you can get away with the pad averages wearing out and steels remaining flat.

But here's the thing. With a fresh set of frictions and steels, the star, the Brock mods, I'd make a clutch center holding tool from the old frictions and steels. Take a friction and steel and rivet them together so you can hold the clutch center from spinning. This locks the inner to the outer clutches so the nut can be air tooled off, or a breaker bar and/or torqued to spec you sacrifice the original set of clutches.

* Last updated by: Hub on 4/6/2015 @ 6:14 PM *

I just disassembled the clutch again and removed all the plates in the basket. Some notes:

-After first 8 steels were removed, there's a belleville washer (imaginary cone faces into the engine)
-8th steel plate was scored on back side enough to snag my fingernail because of the belleville washer
-Regular steel washer after the belleville, stuck to the 9th & last steel plate with residual oil
-Friction plate 9 (second to last if working from the outside in) is shaped different, thinner ring width, like this O O
-All friction plates have numbers stamped on a tang, ALL numbers face into the engine except the last friction (plate 10) which faces out away from the engine
-All steel plates blued except the innermost/last one (Plate 9 closest to engine) which was like brand new silver. Steels are the most blue at outside, and as I worked inward they were less and less blue, last one being ZERO blue

I performed the light test on the steels all stacked up with the oil wiped off, and with no pressure on them just using their own weight I could easily see light between them. That is without even shuffling them around to change the order. Nearly any angle around the outside circumference (holding a flashlight on the other side) I saw light coming through. I also put weight onto the plates of 13lbs+, and looked again....still have light coming through but not nearly as much. Pics below.

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 4/6/2015 @ 6:31 PM *

Like I said, pleasantly worn out; the book gives you so much air gap for the steels, but I'm all new frictions/steels/judder ring/backup j-ring washer/gasket. Note the A/B thicknesses on the parts page. This is where the wear is within spec, but the pack is out of spec. You add this thicker steel (A's and/or B's) so the pack dials back in.

So again, the loophole is I pack the fattest steel for that one area, not all fat steels or the pack falls past the clutch outer tangs. Where the steels call for 9 steels at 2.6. The other optional 2.3 and 2.9 is how that 9th plate stacks up; to use the pun; against the blueprinted number = to aim for are the steel options.

Back to the parts page to see the options. I want to match the 8 steels and run the fattest 9th plate. I have to run the frictions and the 88B is cut for the judder rings, the 88A is that clearance setting side. The frictions in the middle are non-adjust as were the 88A/B's. The only packing it thicker to meet the 54.2mm are the steels in 3 settings.

I could, meaning, I could match steel for steel and be right back to stock and be within spec is you matching parts. I could, wink-wink, run a 2.9, be someplace like a 54.2 stock and with the 2.9 I am 55 mm, wink-wink with a stronger push at the springs; being more collapsed and who knows if coil bind occurs with the washer moves causing the same effect more or less. Here is where I run freelance book parts no aftermarketshit but OEMmmmmmmm, deliciously almost coil bound.

I just disassembled the clutch again and removed all the plates in the basket.

After first 8 steels were removed, there's a belleville washer (imaginary cone faces into the engine)

8th steel plate was scored on back side enough to snag my fingernail because of the belleville washer

Regular steel washer after the belleville, stuck to the 9th & last steel plate with residual oil
-Friction plate 9 (second to last if working from the outside in) is shaped different, thinner ring width

All friction plates have numbers stamped on a tang, ALL numbers face into the engine except the last friction (plate 10) which faces out away from the engine

All steel plates blued except the innermost/last one (Plate 9 closest to engine) which was like brand new silver. Steels are the most blue at outside, and as I worked inward they were less and less blue, last one being ZERO blue

I performed the light test on the steels all stacked up with the oil wiped off, and with no pressure on them just using their own weight I could easily see light between them.

That is without even shuffling them around to change the order.

Nearly any angle around the outside circumference (holding a flashlight on the other side) I saw light coming through. I also put weight onto the plates of 13lbs+, and looked again....still have light coming through but not nearly as much.

The reason I took it back apart was to inspect the plates better to get a proper judgment on whether it all needs replacing. I have other bikes to ride while it's apart.

I would have kept it together and ordered all new, play out the rides till all the parts came. Noted, however.

What I hear you telling me is to go back to all factory plates...replace my steels and frictions with OEM as recommended by the book for a guaranteed stack height of 54.2mm (all 9 steels 2.6mm).

This and the washer need replacing as a set; as is the steel plate part of that set.

I am not going to replace the belleville washer and flat washer (92145 & 92200) if it's not necessary, and I can't think of why it would be. The belleville will simply make the same mark on any plate, new or old, when the clutch is re-installed.

The cutout for the judder sitting there, if I'm thinking what you are describing.

Correct. The Judder spring (what I've been calling a belleville washer 92145) as well as the standard washer (92200) both fit inside this friction disc, since it's inside diameter is slightly larger than the other discs.

Notice how on the collapse the outer most plate is now rubbing the next one in. The inner most plate has yet to rub next to one and the one out from that, etc. Upon full collapse, there was less scrub time, the more the plates collapse onto each other, the ratio sort of catches up, has less scrub time, etc.

Yes, it makes sense why the outermost steel is VERY blue and the one closest to the engine is like brand new, since that's how a clutch works. It fully compresses the pack together eventually, but it has to start at one end and work through the clutch until full engagement.

I've seen worse so they were kind of played and the suggestion to buy new and leave them alone was more you seeing the obvious. It was already together when we started in on this. That's why it was let it ride till [all] the parts come.

I think you and I are on the same page Hub. It's time for replacing the clutch plates instead of just throwing stronger springs at it. The steels are warped anyway, probably still usable in their current condition, but not ideal for making a 200mph run and using the throttle aggressively. I ordered all the OEM plates this morning, as follows:

Qty (7) 13088-0030 (3.0mm)
Qty (2) 13088-0031 (3.0mm)
Qty (1) 13088-0032 (3.8mm)
Qty (9) 13089-0018 (2.6mm)
Total stack height OEM - 54.2mm = 2.13386"

All 9 of the steels I ordered are the factory 2.6mm size. This brings my clutch stack to the correct height of 54.2mm overall. Combine that with the Brocks spring kit and I will have a very solid clutch with firm engagement. It's not a true lockup clutch, but a very tight squeeze on the plates to hopefully handle the power of the bike.

My next biggest concern is about coil bind, since the clutch stack will be pretty fat and new.....there's less room for the springs already, plus now I'll be installing shims to increase spring pressure, thereby reducing spring height and coming closer and closer to coil bind...

I will make a clutch holding tool out of the old steel/fiber plates once I get the new parts in the mail and verify they're all correct.

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 4/7/2015 @ 7:39 AM *

What I hear you telling me is to go back to all factory plates, replacing my steels and frictions with OEM ones recommended by the book for a guaranteed stack height of 54.2mm (all 9 steels 2.6mm).

What I am saying is yes, all factory parts, and listen to what you are saying to what loophole I am showing...
You: 9 steel plates all 2.6mm = 54.2mm is book compliance.
Me: 8 steel plates at 2.6 and one 2.9 = 54.5mm -wink-wink. (compressed the springs more, shorter throw, cleaner shift, smoother transition.

I am not going to replace the belleville washer and flat washer (92145 & 92200) if it's not necessary, and I can't think of why it would be.

Part 2 is the judder is shorter, less spring action, less [push away] off from the plate behind it, more judder happening to stop the tiny chatter it is there for. You let that one plate stick without judder, it is like sticking both clutch inner and outer to roll up to that bumper and now look at that [at one time] the cleanest steel.

My next biggest concern is about coil bind, since the clutch stack will be pretty fat and new.....it's that much less room for the springs already.

What I am saying is yes, all factory parts, and listen to what you are saying to what loophole I am showing...
You: 9 steel plates all 2.6mm = 54.2mm is book compliance.
Me: 8 steel plates at 2.6 and one 2.9 = 54.5mm -wink-wink. (compressed the springs more, shorter throw, cleaner shift, smoother transition.

If you think that I can fit 8 of the 2.6mm steel plates and 1 of the 2.9mm steel plates plus the Brocks springs with .180 shim, then I'll give it a shot when the parts arrive. The stack up will be at 54.5mm overall (theoretically) just like you said. Where would you put that thicker 2.9mm plate then? Closest to the engine at the inside or furthest from the engine on the outside of the stack? I hope it's as simple as you say to get shorter throw, cleaner shifts, and smoother transitions....

Yes you are. I'm going to convince you of one simple [snowballing] move. The repeat is to rub both hands together. Which palm stayed cold? So in proportion, as in even is the wear factor, we have evenly shaved down the judder to groove in steel plate is fine shavings along with the fiber is sitting in the sump of not tearing out the oil pump blades and into the filter it goes. That's the leftovers you see.

When I rub my hands together they both get hot, neither palm is cold. You used that analogy to tell me that both the 8th steel plate and judder spring rubbing together caused them to wear together as a pair, and since I'm replacing the steels I need to replace the judder and washer (92145 & 92200)?

Part 2 is the judder is shorter, less spring action, less [push away] off from the plate behind it, more judder happening to stop the tiny chatter it is there for.

What I think you mean here is since the judder has been worn down for 5,700 miles or so that it is worn down enough to make it thinner, and therefore weaker than a new judder spring. It is less effective at doing its job of reducing judder because of this?

You let that one plate stick without judder, it is like sticking both clutch inner and outer to roll up to that bumper and now look at that [at one time] the cleanest steel.

Not sure that I understand this. If the judder wasn't working to its full potential, then the cleanest steel in my clutch (9th plate closest to the engine) would then be getting worn down more....since the judder wouldn't be pushing them apart properly..?

Here's the deal on springs. Stacking is a time delay, not an added pressure. By stacking, you pull the clutch in more before it lets up all normal pressure, right? A stiffer made spring is right there right now. Do you sort of see it? So the stiffer spring would be no shims needed, if say the coils were equal height to the OEM.

Do you mean that with a fresh clutch installed at FULL thickness (or even a touch more if using a 2.9mm steel like you suggested) then the super-strong shimmed-up Brocks springs are not totally necessary? Since the spring will naturally be more compressed already because of the 54.5mm clutch pack itself.....then even the OEM springs would have been exerting more pressure than they did last week on my worn clutch pack?

Here's some really interesting information. I measured all my steel clutch plates today with a calipers, and here are the results:

Plate 1 - 2.3mm (Outermost - closest to me)
Plate 2 - 2.3mm
Plate 3 - 2.6mm
Plate 4 - 2.6mm
Plate 5 - 2.6mm
Plate 6 - 2.6mm
Plate 7 - 2.6mm
Plate 8 - 2.6mm
Plate 9 - 2.6mm (Innermost - closest to engine)

* Last updated by: Bradley427 on 4/7/2015 @ 5:48 PM *

Where would you put that thicker 2.9mm plate then?

I hope it's as simple as you say to get shorter throw, cleaner shifts, and smoother transitions

You used that analogy to tell me that both the 8th steel plate and judder spring rubbing together caused them to wear together as a pair

and since I'm replacing the steels I need to replace the judder and washer (92145 & 92200)?

... since the judder has been worn down... it is worn down enough ... is less effective at doing its job of reducing judder because of this?

Not sure that I understand this. If the judder wasn't working to its full potential, then the cleanest steel in my clutch (9th plate closest to the engine) would then be getting worn down more....since the judder wouldn't be pushing them apart properly..?

... then the super-strong shimmed-up Brocks springs are not totally necessary?

...then even the OEM springs would have been exerting more pressure than they did last week on my worn clutch pack?

Here is my setup if I were to rebuild the pack and set the heaviest plate in said position.

Plate 1 - 2.3mm (Outermost - closest to me)
Plate 2 - 2.3mm
Plate 3 - 2.6mm
Plate 4 - 2.6mm
Plate 5 - 2.6mm
Plate 6 - 2.6mm
Plate 7 - 2.6mm
Plate 8 - 2.6mm
Plate 9 - 2.9mm (Innermost - closest to engine)
No judder or ring.
Stock springs.