What I see in that article does make sense. . .
The DMD does in fact "use up" more horsepower than the standard damper does, simply because it is a heavier mass hanging on the end of the crank. But, on the flip side, when you have a crank whipping and flexing because you aren't dampening things torsionally enough, that is affecting the power losses due to friction, often severely. As the DMD eats up more hp, it also allows the rest of the system to not bind up as much, freeing up wasted power. And according to that article, often times it is a net gain in power delivered to the flywheel. I'm not exactly certain how the #'s work out on a Duratec as far as greater power. but given what we know about Duratec crank whip, it wouldn't surprise me if similar gains were realized.
All that said, I think it is advisable for most folks to go get one for the sake of longevity of the engine anyway, regardless of potential power benefits.
Do I have one? No, I actually don't. Though, its been a moral battle for me to decide whether or not to get one. See, I swore to myself I wouldn't do any expensive engine work on the contour, unless the engine let go and I had to do it anyway . . . So, when its time for that new motor, lol, its definately getting a DMD.
Oh, and in response to where else you can take weight out in an engine; you take it out everywhere you can without sacrificing the strength the engine needs to run the way you plan it to. Pistons, rods, block, crank, heads, valvetrain, etc. etc. Its always a trade-off though, the more material you remove, the wekaer the part becomes. The lightest part in the world doesn't do squat if its so fragile the engine breaks as soon as you fire the thing up . . .
