Considering aluminum flywheel... - FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com Message Board

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Considering aluminum flywheel...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Considering aluminum flywheel...

    Well apparently there are two schools of thought with this so here goes:

    1) You lose inertia and 60' times would be adversely affected. However, acceleration would be greatly improved, bettering ET overall.

    2) 60' times would be unaffected or would be better and the rest of the ET would improve as well.

    Please don't tell me I'm gonna stall my car 'cause people also said the dual friction clutch makes you stall too, so I'm not worried about stalling.
    2002 Pewter V6 Camaro M5 <br /><br />Quickest stock-motor N/A V6 4th Gen F-body.<br />2nd Quickest N/A V6 4th Gen F-body overall.<br />mods: Gear, weight reduction, tuning <br /><br />Fear the Gear. 13.585 @ 100.05 1.827 60\'<br /><br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.NJFBOA.org\" target=\"_blank\">www.NJFBOA.org</a>

  • #2
    Who told you that a dual friction would make your car stall? :rolleyes: Especially since your car has 4.10s, that is just a stupid statement. What the aluminum flywheel will help is with accelerating from lower rpms. Anytime you can lower your rotating mass, you will gain hp. What the old schoolers around here have told me that the heavier flywheels are better since they help keep engine speed higher during shifting. But also those old schoolers are running big block engines putting out a lot of hp.

    Comment


    • #3
      I'd say go for it...

      less rotational mass... and you don't have to worry about the inertia continuing to spin the motor if you just keep the foot on the gas while you shift ;)

      I am by no means an expert, but I don't see how it will affect your 60' any... only thing I see is the motor will spin up faster, with less weight on it.
      -Eric<br /><a href=\"http://www.cardomain.com/id/mustangeater82\" target=\"_blank\">2000 NBM V6 Camaro 5-speed</a> T-top <i>converted</i><br /><b>14.467@95.45mph</b> <i>$0 in mods</i><br /><i>The member formerly known as MustangEater8251</i>

      Comment


      • #4
        Are there any differences as far as life expectancy with the aluminum flywheel?

        - Justin
        <a href=\"http://www.njfboa.org\" target=\"_blank\">New Jersey F-Body Owners Association</a><br />1987 Camaro LT - 400sbc, Aluminum L98\'s w/valve job, Comp XE 274, Q-Junk 750, 3.23 posi, 4.10\'s soon.<br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.njfboa.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=11\" target=\"_blank\">East Coast F-Body Nationals - August 14, 2005</a>

        Comment


        • #5
          Get rid of that extra weight!!!

          Do it!!!
          Race car - gone but not forgotten - 1997 firebird V6
          nitrous et & mph: 12.168 & 110.95 mph, n/a 13.746 & 96.38 mph
          2013 Dodge Challenger SRT8: 12.125, 116.45
          2010 Ford Taurus SHO: no times yet

          Comment


          • #6
            Buy me one and I'll let you know how it works out!

            ;)
            Keith - 99 'maro - White M5 - bumpstick and boltons - 13.65 @ 101 N/A
            "I ain't too big to listen to the rumors, I'm just too @#$% big to pay attention to them" - Dr. Dre
            http://seppo.hopto.org/

            Comment


            • #7
              weight on the motor is not the same as weight after the motor. Less mass after IE driveshaft's wheels ect ect is good. But on the motor you can hurt yourself. Yes you will build RPM faster and mainatin your RPM's when you shift. but it WILL lower the inertial force on a launch and hurt your 60 foot. I'm trying to think of a good anology to explain it but I can't seem to think of one. I have a link somewhere that explains it better, I'll see if I can dig it up
              1996 Silver camaro Z28. M6,<br />12 bolt, 4.11\'s, posi, Rear cover, Spec stage 2, loudmouth, more <a href=\"http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=1\" target=\"_blank\">http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=1</a> &lt;Mods, Pics & more <a href=\"http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=2\" target=\"_blank\">http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=2</a> &lt;Fbody Tech Articals

              Comment


              • #8
                The aluminum flywheel will probably hurt your more than anything. You need the extra inertia to get you off the line. True it may run quicker once you get going but most of the ET is off the line, not down track. I know for a fact all the NHRA/IHRA Stock cars run heavy flywheels.
                <b>Black</b> 1998 Pontiac <i>Firebird</i> A-4 swap<br />271.4rwhp/259.4rwtq NA<br />13.30@102.44 <br /><a href=\"http://www.freewebs.com/wickedsix98\" target=\"_blank\">www.freewebs.com/wickedsix98</a>

                Comment


                • #9
                  Anyone with literature or other proof either way on this one?
                  2002 Pewter V6 Camaro M5 <br /><br />Quickest stock-motor N/A V6 4th Gen F-body.<br />2nd Quickest N/A V6 4th Gen F-body overall.<br />mods: Gear, weight reduction, tuning <br /><br />Fear the Gear. 13.585 @ 100.05 1.827 60\'<br /><br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.NJFBOA.org\" target=\"_blank\">www.NJFBOA.org</a>

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have not seen any tested proof... Even if there was it's not going to help you. Ever make, model even every single car for that matter is different. Then when you throw mods into the mix then it's even worse. There is however working forumlas of intercial force, energy, HP and TQ formulations etc etc that will be your best source of figuring out what to do. And all of the very, VERY smart automotive people that I know the censensis is the same. If your road racing or auto X ing go light. If your draging go heavy..
                    1996 Silver camaro Z28. M6,<br />12 bolt, 4.11\'s, posi, Rear cover, Spec stage 2, loudmouth, more <a href=\"http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=1\" target=\"_blank\">http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=1</a> &lt;Mods, Pics & more <a href=\"http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=2\" target=\"_blank\">http://home.mainstreamtopics.com/?index=3&module=2</a> &lt;Fbody Tech Articals

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      oh ****, not this argument again...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by HBHRacing:
                        I have not seen any tested proof... Even if there was it's not going to help you. Ever make, model even every single car for that matter is different. Then when you throw mods into the mix then it's even worse. There is however working forumlas of intercial force, energy, HP and TQ formulations etc etc that will be your best source of figuring out what to do. And all of the very, VERY smart automotive people that I know the censensis is the same. If your road racing or auto X ing go light. If your draging go heavy..
                        Yeah, I'll talk to a engineer buddy of mine about some sort of a formula. Your input is much appreciated. I'll also call up Spec and see what they have to say about it.
                        2002 Pewter V6 Camaro M5 <br /><br />Quickest stock-motor N/A V6 4th Gen F-body.<br />2nd Quickest N/A V6 4th Gen F-body overall.<br />mods: Gear, weight reduction, tuning <br /><br />Fear the Gear. 13.585 @ 100.05 1.827 60\'<br /><br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.NJFBOA.org\" target=\"_blank\">www.NJFBOA.org</a>

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          You will have to definitly launch a little harder at the track with an aluminum flywheel. If you dont it will definitly hurt your 60'
                          <b>2000 Firebird </b><br /><i>old setup </i>- Automatic Whisper lid, Borla catback, shift kit w/ V8 servo, 3.42 gears w/ LSD, PI 3000 converter, <br /><br /><i>14.703@90.92, 2.01 60\' </i>(intake and exhaust)<br /><br /><i> new setup </i> swapped over to LS1 413.9rwhp/398.7rwtq<br /><a href=\"http://www.thunderracing.com\" target=\"_blank\">www.thunderracing.com</a>

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Seppo Kaitainen:
                            Buy me one and I'll let you know how it works out!

                            ;)
                            Like I said... I'll test it out. Though I can't afford the flywheel.
                            Keith - 99 'maro - White M5 - bumpstick and boltons - 13.65 @ 101 N/A
                            "I ain't too big to listen to the rumors, I'm just too @#$% big to pay attention to them" - Dr. Dre
                            http://seppo.hopto.org/

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by john00v6a4:
                              You will have to definitly launch a little harder at the track with an aluminum flywheel. If you dont it will definitly hurt your 60'
                              I'm already launching @ 5k, so are we talking 6k if I get it?
                              2002 Pewter V6 Camaro M5 <br /><br />Quickest stock-motor N/A V6 4th Gen F-body.<br />2nd Quickest N/A V6 4th Gen F-body overall.<br />mods: Gear, weight reduction, tuning <br /><br />Fear the Gear. 13.585 @ 100.05 1.827 60\'<br /><br /><br /><a href=\"http://www.NJFBOA.org\" target=\"_blank\">www.NJFBOA.org</a>

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              FORUM SPONSORS

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X