Search



Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Engine Swap
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?

Engine Swap Everything about swapping an engine into your Third Gen.....be it V6, V8, LTX/LSX, crate engine, etc. Pictures, questions, answers, and work logs.

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-08-2011, 02:25 PM   #1
Supreme Member
 
chevyracingrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,086
Car: 88 IROC, 76 Malibu Classic
Engine: 350 TPI, 350
Transmission: 700R4, 4-speed
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt ????

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to chevyracingrox
one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

I've been looking at different engines lately and I was just wondering what the difference was between flywheels on the newer and older sbc. Are they interchangeable with each other? Do they all fit the same clutches and will they all fit in the same bellhousings? Do they need to have different starters?
__________________
chevyracingrox is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 02:59 PM   #2
Supreme Member
 
ASE doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Aurora, OR
Posts: 3,599
Car: 87 IROC Z28
Engine: 355 cid TPI, very built
Transmission: Pro Built Automatic w/3,500 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.27 Limited slip

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

The basic difference between one piece and two piece rear main seal engines is in the balance. Two piece rear main seal crankshafts are internally balanced and use a neutral balance flexplate. One piece rear main seal crankshafts rely on a weighted flexplate or flywheel for balance. Flexplates/flywheels for the two are not interchangeable. Ring gears are either 153 or 168 tooth on either one piece or two piece flexplates. It's the number of teeth(diameter) that affects starter compatibility.
__________________
Half effort yields half results.

87 IROC Z28, 355 TPI, 10.2:1, 6" rods, balanced, clearanced, TFS G2 heads fully ported, ZZX Cam, ported Superram base, large tube runners, 1 3/4 pri coated stainless short tube, 58mmTB on ported plenum, ram air, high flow air lid, 24lb bosch @ 70 psi, ACCEL DFI, MSD D6, funct hood louvers, etc. SSM SFCs, Hotchkis rear links& strt twr brace, Eibach Sportline, Koni Red S&S, PST bushings, Ed's 13" w/WW 4 piston calipers in front, LS1s in back. GTA seats, MOMO wheel, B&M Megashifter
ASE doc is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 04:53 PM   #3
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASE doc View Post
Flexplates/flywheels for the two are not interchangeable.

Because of the balance differences , the two styles have a different bolt pattern to the crank to prevent them being swapped.
Other than that there is no difference as far as related parts go
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 05:15 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
89_RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ft Wayne, IN
Posts: 808
Car: 89 RS Camaro
Engine: LO3
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: GM 10 Bolt/2.73 Open

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASE doc View Post
Two piece rear main seal crankshafts are internally balanced and use a neutral balance flexplate. One piece rear main seal crankshafts rely on a weighted flexplate or flywheel for balance.
Thats backwards. One piece RMS cranks are all internal balance. 2-piece RMS cranks are all external balance.
89_RS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 06:14 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 848
Car: 1987 IROC-Z red t-top
Engine: TPI 355 alum heads
Transmission: Stalled 700R4
Axle/Gears: 9bolt 3.27 Borg Warner

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 89_RS View Post
Thats backwards. One piece RMS cranks are all internal balance. 2-piece RMS cranks are all external balance.
I was thinking that and what they said makes no sense y go backwards
Sojer is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 07:19 PM   #6
Moderator
 
five7kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Littleton, CO USA
Posts: 41,970
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: LS1/LQ4
Transmission: 4L60E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 10B-3.73/9"-3.89

Classifieds Rating: (14)

Here we go again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASE doc View Post
The basic difference between one piece and two piece rear main seal engines is in the balance. Two piece rear main seal crankshafts are internally balanced and use a neutral balance flexplate. One piece rear main seal crankshafts rely on a weighted flexplate or flywheel for balance.
No, no, NO! The basic difference is the crank flange for mounting the flexplate or flywheel. THAT'S ALL THAT IS IMPORTANT! That is what makes the two non-interchangeable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 89_RS View Post
Thats backwards. One piece RMS cranks are all internal balance. 2-piece RMS cranks are all external balance.
Wrong again. They are BOTH internal balance!

The 1-piece rear main moved the external counterweight that was built into the 2-piece rear main crank to the flexplate/flywheel. That does NOT make 1-piece "external" balance (or 2-piece, for that matter). Both use a neutrally balanced harmonic damper (except as noted below), which is really what distinguishes "internal" from "external" balance.

The factory used an additional weight on the harmonic damper and flexplate/flywheel for the 3.75" stroke cranks to achieve rotating assembly balance (factory 3.75" cranks were all 2-piece, and all had that exact same counterweight built into the crank external to the RMS that the shorter stroke cranks had). They did this due to space limitations within the crankcase for counterweights (without using "heavy" metal such as mallorymetal). This is the true "external" balance, and only that.

If the damper is neutrally balanced, the engine is "internal" balance. No ifs, ands, buts, or exceptions.
five7kid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 07:31 PM   #7
Moderator
 
five7kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Littleton, CO USA
Posts: 41,970
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: LS1/LQ4
Transmission: 4L60E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 10B-3.73/9"-3.89

Classifieds Rating: (14)

To explain further, you can't slip a 1-piece rear main seal over the back of the crank flange and that built-in counterweight. The output flange of a 1-piece RMS crank is constant behind the rear main bearing journal to the flange.

One-piece:

Click the image to open in full size.


Two-piece:

Click the image to open in full size.
five7kid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 07:56 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
89_RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ft Wayne, IN
Posts: 808
Car: 89 RS Camaro
Engine: LO3
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: GM 10 Bolt/2.73 Open

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by five7kid View Post
To explain further, you can't slip a 1-piece rear main seal over the back of the crank flange and that built-in counterweight. The output flange of a 1-piece RMS crank is constant behind the rear main bearing journal to the flange.

One-piece:

Click the image to open in full size.


Two-piece:

Click the image to open in full size.
I'm assuming that if I read the picture left to right it is rear to front on the crank correct?
89_RS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 09:10 PM   #9
Supreme Member
 
zenish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: stallings,n.c.
Posts: 1,133
Car: 1989 camaro rs convertable
Engine: 305 tbi
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 7.5"3.42 gears forth gen 2000 camar

Classifieds Rating: (0)

Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

the flexplate goes on the left end.
zenish is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 09:52 PM   #10
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by five7kid View Post
Wrong again. They are BOTH internal balance!

The 1-piece rear main moved the external counterweight that was built into the 2-piece rear main crank to the flexplate/flywheel.
That does NOT make 1-piece "external" balance (or 2-piece, for that matter).


The essential element here is the weight position was MOVED
The popular misconception arises from aftermarket makers calling anything with a weight on it "external" balance
( as opposed to neutral balance ) which relates to the flywheel / flexplate only; not the actual engine balance style.

Last edited by vetteoz; 12-08-2011 at 09:56 PM.
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2011, 02:34 PM   #11
Supreme Member
 
ASE doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Aurora, OR
Posts: 3,599
Car: 87 IROC Z28
Engine: 355 cid TPI, very built
Transmission: Pro Built Automatic w/3,500 stall
Axle/Gears: 3.27 Limited slip

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

The two piece RMS SBC engine is completely balanced with no external counterweights needed. To call the one piece RMS engine internally balanced is misleading and incorrect as it requires a counter balanced flexplate to compensate for the smooth rear flange. If it were truly internally balanced, like its predecessor, it would not need an external counterweight. Yes, the one piece crankshaft takes the same harmonic balancer as the two piece, internally balanced crankshaft. Excuse me forgetting the difference in the bolt pattern.
__________________
Half effort yields half results.

87 IROC Z28, 355 TPI, 10.2:1, 6" rods, balanced, clearanced, TFS G2 heads fully ported, ZZX Cam, ported Superram base, large tube runners, 1 3/4 pri coated stainless short tube, 58mmTB on ported plenum, ram air, high flow air lid, 24lb bosch @ 70 psi, ACCEL DFI, MSD D6, funct hood louvers, etc. SSM SFCs, Hotchkis rear links& strt twr brace, Eibach Sportline, Koni Red S&S, PST bushings, Ed's 13" w/WW 4 piston calipers in front, LS1s in back. GTA seats, MOMO wheel, B&M Megashifter
ASE doc is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2011, 03:09 PM   #12
Member
 
chesterfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: California
Posts: 475
Car: Pontiac

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by five7kid View Post
Here we go again...

They did this due to space limitations within the crankcase for counterweights (without using "heavy" metal such as mallorymetal). This is the true "external" balance, and only that.
Well, couldn't you say the same thing for the one piece?
chesterfield is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2011, 03:10 PM   #13
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,893
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Five7 and vettoz are correct; ALL SBCs except the 400, including the 1-pc RMS ones, are internally balanced.

The terms "internal" and "external" balance DO NOT refer to which part the counterweight is attached to. The weight on the flywheel of a 1-pc motor, while it might look "external" to the untrained eye, is actually an INTERNAL weight; specifically, it is exactly the same INTERNAL weight that used to be provided by that funky shaped flange on a 2-pc RMS crank, it just had to be moved to allow the seal to slip over the crank. This DOES NOT make it "external".

Best to AVOID those words altogether and not fall into the confusion.

To answer the OP's question ACCURATELY, the flywheels or flex plates DO NOT interchange, which is why there are 2 different kinds. (duh) The differences are the bolt pattern, the ID of the big hole in the middle, and the presence of the INTERNAL counterweight on the 1-pc ones and absence of it on the 2-pc ones.
__________________
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
William of Ockham, c. 1330 AD, from Quaestiones et decisiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi

Roughly paraphrased into modern English, and applied to figuring out what's wrong with your car:

The simplest explanation that fits all the facts is probably the right one.
sofakingdom is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2011, 10:31 AM   #14
Supreme Member
 
1gary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,416

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

If you find a nice two pc crank and have already a 1 pc block,you can swap those.
__________________
The good thing about a do-over is you get to really learn what you knew in the first place.
1gary is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:33 AM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 446
Car: 86 Firebird LG4
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 limited slip

Classifieds Rating: (3)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sofakingdom View Post
Five7 and vettoz are correct; ALL SBCs except the 400, including the 1-pc RMS ones, are internally balanced.

The terms "internal" and "external" balance DO NOT refer to which part the counterweight is attached to. The weight on the flywheel of a 1-pc motor, while it might look "external" to the untrained eye, is actually an INTERNAL weight; specifically, it is exactly the same INTERNAL weight that used to be provided by that funky shaped flange on a 2-pc RMS crank, it just had to be moved to allow the seal to slip over the crank. This DOES NOT make it "external".

Best to AVOID those words altogether and not fall into the confusion.

To answer the OP's question ACCURATELY, the flywheels or flex plates DO NOT interchange, which is why there are 2 different kinds. (duh) The differences are the bolt pattern, the ID of the big hole in the middle, and the presence of the INTERNAL counterweight on the 1-pc ones and absence of it on the 2-pc ones.
Hold on I'm a little confused here. I've been looking at the bolt holes on the 1 piece and 2 piece flexplates and they look exactly the same:

1 piece:
Click the image to open in full size.

2 piece:
Click the image to open in full size.

the 2 piece has smaller holes drilled on the outer part and the 1 piece has just a few bigger holes on the outer. That's just a weight balance thing I guess? (it's 2 different brands).

Also I just checked my flexplate that was on my 2 piece 350 and it looks like it has the same bolt pattern as these two?

Links:
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/TCI-399774/?rtype=10
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SUM-G100SFI/?rtype=10

Last edited by 0pyders; 12-20-2011 at 01:41 AM.
0pyders is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:38 AM   #16
Supreme Member
 
xpndbl3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Orland Park, IL
Posts: 13,564
Car: 1984 Z28
Engine: SLOW carbed ls
Transmission: TH400 with brake, 8" PTC converter
Axle/Gears: moser 9" 4.11

Classifieds Rating: (5)

Send a message via AIM to xpndbl3
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

did you skip the most important part of those links from summit??? directly under the pic?



Image is a representation of this part. Actual part may vary.
xpndbl3 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:45 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 446
Car: 86 Firebird LG4
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 limited slip

Classifieds Rating: (3)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Oh haha, I feel dumb. Nevermind.

Last edited by 0pyders; 12-20-2011 at 02:01 AM.
0pyders is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 02:18 AM   #18
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0pyders View Post
Hold on I'm a little confused here. I've been looking at the bolt holes on the 1 piece and 2 piece flexplates and they look exactly the same:
"Looks" being the operative word.
Center hole is smaller on 1 pce flexplate and it will not fit on 2 pce crank, regardless of crank bolt pattern
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 04:09 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 446
Car: 86 Firebird LG4
Engine: 350
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 limited slip

Classifieds Rating: (3)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by vetteoz View Post
"Looks" being the operative word.
Center hole is smaller on 1 pce flexplate and it will not fit on 2 pce crank, regardless of crank bolt pattern
Ok I got it now. Thank you.
0pyders is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 03:35 PM   #20
Moderator
 
five7kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Littleton, CO USA
Posts: 41,970
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: LS1/LQ4
Transmission: 4L60E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 10B-3.73/9"-3.89

Classifieds Rating: (14)

Here is a 1-piece RMS flexplate showing the weight.

Click the image to open in full size.

It's often called a "bat wing" weight because of its shape.

Summit improperly lists the flexplate as "external balance". Look up the same p/n on sdparts.com and you'll see "counterweighted", which is more accurate. No mention of "internal" or "external" balance.

The real key is 1- or 2-piece RMS, which both Summit and sdparts properly designate it as 1-piece.

(It is also noteworthy that your pics were of the opposite side of the flexplate, so those views would not show the counterweight.)

Last edited by five7kid; 12-20-2011 at 03:42 PM.
five7kid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 03:14 PM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: British columbia, Canada
Posts: 386
Car: 1986 Firebird
Engine: 5.0L V8
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: 2.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

easiest way to tell how many teeth your flywheel has?
Trevmust is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 07:59 PM   #22
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,893
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

1... 2.... 3.... 5... 4..... (fooled ya!!!)

Seriously, a 153-tooth is 12.8" dia, a 168 is 14".
__________________
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
William of Ockham, c. 1330 AD, from Quaestiones et decisiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi

Roughly paraphrased into modern English, and applied to figuring out what's wrong with your car:

The simplest explanation that fits all the facts is probably the right one.
sofakingdom is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 08:22 PM   #23
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: British columbia, Canada
Posts: 386
Car: 1986 Firebird
Engine: 5.0L V8
Transmission: T-5
Axle/Gears: 2.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

thank god lol. I thought I would have to do math.
Trevmust is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 10:55 PM   #24
Supreme Member
 
chevyracingrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,086
Car: 88 IROC, 76 Malibu Classic
Engine: 350 TPI, 350
Transmission: 700R4, 4-speed
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt ????

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to chevyracingrox
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Good to know, I was wondering that myself.
__________________
chevyracingrox is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:07 PM   #25
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chevyracingrox View Post
I was wondering that myself.
And if the flexplate is still in the car you don't even have to take it out and measure it.
A 153 tooth FW takes the starter with inline mounting bolts;
A 168 tooth has the starter with offset bolts


Click the image to open in full size.
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:25 AM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 42
Car: 1987 Camaro IROC Z28
Engine: 383 SBC
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.27 BW rear End

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

OK, my head is spinning (out-of-balance) after reading all this. I have read several forums on the explanations and remain confused. But here is my question:

I bought a 383 stroked IROC with auto 700R4 tranny. It ran great (smooth also). I decided this winter to do a T56 swap from a 97 Camaro.
First step, found out the flywheel would not fit because it was from a 1-pc rear seal. So I did my homework and found I need the 2pc RMS based on the bolt pattern.

I bought the Ram Clutch #798-2555 alum neutral balance flywheel. Once I bolted it on, I started the car and it felt rough. The dummy (me) then when on to complete the installation and my first trip down the street I knew it was out-of-balance.

Went home and checked my flexplate that was previously installed and it has a counterweight that is about 6" long on it and a single hole opposite 180deg.

So, it looks like my new neutral balance flywheel needs to have a counterweight to match the old flexplate counterweight to get balance back in my life. BTW, it also moved me from the 14" flexplate, to 12.8 flywheel.

So I am guessing in can carry the two somewhere and they will know how to put a counterweight on my flywheel to fix the problem.

Question: short of disassembling the motor, how can you determine what amount of counterweight is needed on the neutral balance flywheel other than using the original flexplate counterweight?
jbradhill is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 02:33 PM   #27
Moderator
 
five7kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Littleton, CO USA
Posts: 41,970
Car: 82 Berlinetta/57 Bel Air
Engine: LS1/LQ4
Transmission: 4L60E/4L80E
Axle/Gears: 10B-3.73/9"-3.89

Classifieds Rating: (14)

They would probably take weight off of the opposite side of the flywheel.

A shop that knows what they're doing would know how much to "unbalance" the flywheel to put it to factory external specs.
five7kid is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:37 AM   #28
Supreme Member
 
chevyracingrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 1,086
Car: 88 IROC, 76 Malibu Classic
Engine: 350 TPI, 350
Transmission: 700R4, 4-speed
Axle/Gears: 10 bolt ????

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to chevyracingrox
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Interesting, so it's an external balanced crank like a 400 would have? I thought the trend nowadays was to buy a "stroker" crank that was internal balance.
__________________
chevyracingrox is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 12:57 PM   #29
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 42
Car: 1987 Camaro IROC Z28
Engine: 383 SBC
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.27 BW rear End

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

yep, I was too pumped about getting this thing running and I didn't even think about this being a 383 stroker instead of a 350.... so now, I have bought the wrong flywheel twice ($79, $435 .... ). I am going to try to find a machine shop who will put a counterweight on a neutal balance flywheel. We will see if I am successful. If now, I have another flywheel for sale if someone is interested.
jbradhill is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:38 PM   #30
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chevyracingrox View Post
Interesting, so it's an external balanced crank like a 400 would have?
I thought the trend nowadays was to buy a "stroker" crank that was internal balance.
The lower cost stroker kits use a 3.750" crank based on a 400 crank casting (w/ 350 journals ) so they still need the true "external " balance parts a 400 does
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:47 PM   #31
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 7,472
Car: 90 Vette / 67 Camaro / 87 Vette
Engine: 383 SP EFI /383 LT1 /L98 TPI
Transmission: T400 /200R4 /T700
Axle/Gears: 9" 3.90 /12 Bolt 4.11 /D44 3.07

Classifieds Rating: (13)
Re: one piece vs. two piece rear main (flywheel)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbradhill View Post
I didn't even think about this being a 383 stroker instead of a 350...
I am going to try to find a machine shop who will put a counterweight on a neutal balance flywheel.
If you have 2 pce RMS crank with a counterweight weight then it should be 400 balance ? ( unless someone did a weird hybrid balance job )

Could try one of these
http://haysclutches.com/drivetrain/f...te-offset.html
http://www.northernautoparts.com/Pro...ProductId=3906
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/fiz-624001


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/s...ead.php?t=8241
vetteoz is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:47 PM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > Engine Swap

Tags
2007, 350, 355, balance, coilovers, difference, flexplate, flywheel, flywheels, interchangeable, main, peice, piece, ram, rear, rms, sbc, seal, year
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright 1997 - 2014 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details