|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,248
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,248 |
Terry, do the lightweight aluminum flywheels have an adverse effect on crank harmonics/crank whip? Or does the dual mode damper keep doing its job..
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
Stock SVT Duratec V6 with:
Intake- K&N filter/75mm MAF meter
Exhaust- MSDS Y-pipe/Bassani catback
Durability-Ford "dual mode" damper, Mobil 1/K&N oil filter
179.2 FWHP at 6900 RPM
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 153
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 153 |
Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
Terry, do the lightweight aluminum flywheels have an adverse effect on crank harmonics/crank whip? Or does the dual mode damper keep doing its job.. Not sure about harmonics, but on a similar note I was reading a blurb in Road&Track a while back about the 50+ lb flywheel on the M5. Seems to meet emissions they have to idle lower than what the engine would really like, so to keep the vibes/tranyy rattle down (it is a BMW after all) they had to crank up the weight of the flywheel.
97 SE MTX, KKM, UR UDP, 19# Injectors, SVT TB, SVT UIM, SVT Flywheel, Grizzly Street Clutch, Upgraded motor mounts, mystifed precats, brand new main cat, SVT exhaust sans resonator, 205-55-15 Dunlop SP5000's 154hp / 156 tq before the SVT exhaust, SVT dual honed upper and swapping the mystery main cat for mystery precats. My Profile
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,528
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,528 |
50 lbs! Geez and it's still so fast.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329 |
I know the flywheel on my Conquest weighed around 32-35lbs.  It's main reason for being so heavy was to make the engine smoother as the large bore (2.6L 4-cylinder!) and rotating weight were hard to keep balanced. (More for drivability then reliabilty IMO) They even used this heavy flywheel AND balance shafts (POS!) to keep engine vibrations in line. Machining the stock flywheel down to 24lbs (minus 8-10lbs) was nearly like putting a new engine in the car it's rev-ability was increased so much! Also removing the balance shafts and internally balancing the engine was good for ~15-18HP.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,812
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,812 |
Dan, I'd imagine that a balanced flywheel should be a-ok.
2000 Silver SVT #1602 Check it out in the registry! Mi Coche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,066
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,066 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also removing the balance shafts and internally balancing the engine was good for ~15-18HP. Can someone explain this to me?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 443 |
Originally posted by jcboeckl: Originally posted by DemonSVT:
[b]
Also removing the balance shafts and internally balancing the engine was good for ~15-18HP. The balance shafts have to be turned by the crankshaft, this in turn consumes power from the engine. By internaly balancing the rotating assembly of the engine you can remove the balance shafts and there drive thus reducing the parasitic drag on the engine. That frees up some horsepower because you are no longer using the engine to turn shafts to balance the engine. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,066
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,066 |
EDIT: NM  Can't read!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 314
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 314 |
Demon meant in his Conquest, not the Contour. We don't have balance shafts if that's what you're thinking.
2000 Silver ZX3
1999 SVT Contour RIP 6/9/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
