What are some of the pros and cons of both aluminum and steel flywheels. I am still debating which to go with. best time so far 14.3 @ 101.1mph(no traction) www.cnnmotorsports.com
#87103, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 1
not to many cons from aluminum, besides gas mileage. steel takes less effort to keep it spinning, and aluminum takes more effort to KEEP it spinning, but alot less to get it spinning (thus mor performance).
______________________________________________ the real skill isnt in the wrenching, its in the tuning and sorting out of the details once the nuts and bolts are tightened up.
70mm mustang TB 2 fuel rails (8-injectors)...in hand but not yet installed. funtional chrome vette sidepipes (true dual exhaust) 75 shot nitrous 4000 watt stereo and bunch of minor mods on her now.
#87104, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 2
steel = less HP. aluminum = more HP, faster revs.
Funny you ask about aluminum... i just happen to have a freshly machined Fidanza aluminum flywheel just waitng for a buyer. it had a spec stage 3...250.00 + shipping. Interested?
USED TO HAVE...Everything you wish you had, and then some...
You are somebody special Tim, you matter! - from the admins (but nobody likes you, because your username is just like that other guy's, and you whine a lot)
#87106, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 3 Mar-14-05 12:27 PM by extreme97nt
If I do go wiht the aluminum setup I will probably have to get a new one because SBC will be building me a fidanza/VR6 clutch combo for 650ftlb tq. Although I do have a brand new CM4 pressure plate and disc sitting in my garage. Any pictures? I am not worried about gas mileage because this is going to be a track car. How much of a paine is it to get the motor back in with a non-modular flywheel? I also have an aluminum rod motor that this will be going on. Will that setup be to light? It would rev like a mother though. Good thing it has a 10k redline. Thanks Paul best time so far 14.3 @ 101.1mph(no traction) www.cnnmotorsports.com
#87111, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 4
is that alum with the spec stage 3?? or is that just the flywheel? if its both ill buy it!
______________________________________________ the real skill isnt in the wrenching, its in the tuning and sorting out of the details once the nuts and bolts are tightened up.
70mm mustang TB 2 fuel rails (8-injectors)...in hand but not yet installed. funtional chrome vette sidepipes (true dual exhaust) 75 shot nitrous 4000 watt stereo and bunch of minor mods on her now.
#87119, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 0
Originally posted by extreme97nt What are some of the pros and cons of both aluminum and steel flywheels. I am still debating which to go with. best time so far 14.3 @ 101.1mph(no traction) www.cnnmotorsports.com
Steel is cheaper for the OE to manufacture and install. ALuminum is ligher and better for performance.
Visit the Howell Automotive Open House August 20th, 2005. The largest gathering of Chrysler 2.0 engines on the planet.
US Small Business Administration Export Business of the Year for 2003
______________________________________________ the real skill isnt in the wrenching, its in the tuning and sorting out of the details once the nuts and bolts are tightened up.
70mm mustang TB 2 fuel rails (8-injectors)...in hand but not yet installed. funtional chrome vette sidepipes (true dual exhaust) 75 shot nitrous 4000 watt stereo and bunch of minor mods on her now.
#87131, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 10
I read somewhere it takes 40hp to run a stock steel flywheel, while the alluminum only takes 15hp.... i think i remembered that correctly but i might be wrong. i think i read that in summit actually.
#87157, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 11 Mar-16-05 06:51 AM by Corbin
Originally posted by ajcfalcon I read somewhere it takes 40hp to run a stock steel flywheel, while the alluminum only takes 15hp.... i think i remembered that correctly but i might be wrong. i think i read that in summit actually.
Technically, it doesn't take any horsepower to run a flywheel. Once it has reached the desired RPM, it doesn't take any energy to keep it spinning (neglecting air friction). Energy is transferred when you accelerate or decelerate the flywheel. Steel flywheels generally have a higher polar moment of inertia than aluminum flywheels (although they don't have to). All things being equal, it would take more energy to accelerate an object with a higher polar moment of intertia than an object with a lower polar moment of inertia. So, it would take more energy to accelerate the steel flywheel than the aluminum one. When you want the car to accelerate, you are asking the drivetrain to accelerate too. So, reducing the polar moment of intertia of things like flywheels, pulleys, and driveshafts will increase the acceleration of the car. The power output of the engine stays the same, but less energy is put into accelerating objects beside the car itself. The energy isn't "wasted" though. Its actually stored in the spinning object. You can use that stored energy to maintain an engine RPM during a shift or when starting from a stop. Depending on what kind of dynomometer is used, changing the polar moment of inertia of items could affect the perceived "power" output.
Corbin
'95 ESI-T Now with more power and fewer leaks
Gimme fuel...Gimme fire...Gimme that which I desire
#87161, "RE: Aluminum VS. Steel" In response to Reply # 12 Mar-16-05 07:36 AM by cougar694u
Originally posted by rhui I think when they say more hp, means more wheelhp. Or in other terms, you are freeing up hp taken up by other objects... eg, AC compressor.
I'm sure it is more in reference to drive train loss, but they want to word it better when they're trying to sell something
Originally posted by Corbin said some good shit...
It's really nice to read replies such as this that actually have good information.
~Luke Facebook 1969 Cougar - 11.91 - 380HP 2007 GSXR 750 1999 OZ - SOLD - 15.26 NA - 14.71 on 75 shot
Search
Printer-friendly copy
1 User in Chat
