I've heard that the 8" makes more torque and smoother trans shifts etc. Can anybody show me a link where I can see some real numbers proving that heavier is better. I don't doubt it, it makes sence, but I'd like to know if it's a noticable difference. I have a 8" balancer on right now because my friend told me it was a good investment.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

anybody?

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

I can only pass on what I've read, that go as big as you can. Now I don't know about noticable difference right away, but I'm sure your engine bearings will thank you.

If your serious look into a fluidampr. There site has a lot of info you might want to check out.

http://www.fluidampr.com

Ron

------------------
'82 Trans Am
'81 Camaro Z-28
'94 Vette LT1 Coupe

 

fluidamper is one of the best. More spinning weight is good because of the additional energy a heavier spinning object has. So less rpm loss after a shift will occur. BUT, it takes power away from the engine putting energy into the heavier spinning mass. So acceleration will suffer. Another way to look at it: Spin a 20 inch bicycle wheel to 10 mph and spin a 20 inch piece of lead to 10 mph. It will be easy to spin the bike wheel to 10mph, but also easy to stop it. The lead wheel will take alot of effort to get it up to 10 mph, but it will also be very difficult to stop. After all that, you need to test both heavy and light to see what works best in your car. In a nearly stock car, I doubt you will notice much of a difference.

...It doesn't make more torque, it stores it and applies it.


------------------
82 camaro--original steering wheel, brake/gas pedals, seats--everything else modified
82camaro



[This message has been edited by 82camaro (edited May 22, 2001).]

 

I recently heard that you don't want a fluid damper for drag racing because it takes a second or two (?) to adjust each time.

------------------
1985 Yellow IROC-Z 5.0 HO, T-5 3.73 Torsen, 4 wheel disks
PFCM pads, GTA wheels, Koni yellows, B&M Ripper, Dynomax

 

.
Damper size has nothing to do with the rpm change from a shift.

Bigger (heavier) will dampen out more harmonics/vibrations, but will take longer to rev up. Unless it is a track only car, run the bigger damper unless you want to replace bearings regularly.

Miles


------------------
88 427 Camaro
12.18 @ 113mph 1.75 60ft
Currently installing 3.73's into my 9 bolt (YES,it is a 9 bolt & YES they are 3.73's, not 3.70. 4.11's to follow soon )
www.koolmeister.com

 

88 427 Camaro said it best. Using the example above, but with a slight twist in a different experiment. While spinning a 10' bike wheel at (any speed, doesn't matter) 20 mph and holding it by the axle. Try rotating it with the axle against the rotation without slowing the wheel down. It doesn't like it does it? Now use a smaller 5' wheel, you should notice it is easier. That is what the larger damper does, helps stabilized the rotational masses. Oh btw, you can use any size wheel for this experiment even 6"-ers, but please becarefull if you use the 10' bike wheel. You could get injured.

Edit: Hey Miles, how'd you get 3.73s on a 9 bolt. Most 9-bolts are 37 ring and 10 pinion tooth count. What are on your's? Is it for strength?

------------------
George P. Lara
3rd Gen, 4th Gen
SCCA, SCFB, SC3GFB

[This message has been edited by MRZ28HO (edited May 21, 2001).]

 

Well with an auto wouldn't you have more torque off the line with a larger balancer? So in effect you WILL have more torque because you'll have more rotational forces.
I've also been told that a heavier flexplate does the same thing. More torque off the line with an auto. It will give you a faster ET but slower mph. Does that make sence?
I'd really like to see some proof either way.
Oh yeah, and about the "no rpm loss", if you have more torque then your engine won't be as "shocked" with a gear change! So it will in effect have a slightly higher rpm after a shift.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

[This message has been edited by JPrevost (edited May 21, 2001).]

 

It's 41/11 ie 3.73, not the common 37/10 (3.70). I am working on getting 4.11's, but have been waiting until I finished the 3.73 install.

The extra tooth on the pinion helps for strength on the pinion, but may hurt the ring gear.

Miles



------------------
88 427 Camaro
12.18 @ 113mph 1.75 60ft
Currently installing 3.73's into my 9 bolt (YES,it is a 9 bolt & YES they are 3.73's, not 3.70. 4.11's to follow soon )
www.koolmeister.com

 

Get a Fluidamper!!!!


An elastomer balancer is only tuned to one area of imbalance (which varies from engine-to-engine, too!!!) whereas the fluidampr is effective in all rpm ranges. If you have used one before, you'll know what I am talking about. If not, try one. Worth the money and all I run on my personal stuff.

 

....And on top of that, a 6 1/4" Fluidampr is more efficient that a stock 8".


Ron

------------------
'82 Trans Am
'81 Camaro Z-28
'94 Vette LT1 Coupe

 

...and on top of that, SCAT recommends AGAINST Fluid-filled, or "rattler" type harmonic balancers, and recommends a good quality SFI approved elastomeric balancer.

They claim to have seen too many bearing failures where the only common variable was the use of a fluid-filled damper.

As always, "for what it is worth".


------------------
Daniel Burk
View my third-gen hobbyist performance page!
View my reader's ride!
'84 Trans Am WS6/L69
KB SFC, Moser axles, Torsen Diff., Spohn Adj. torque arm,
Ported 305 heads w/1.94"intake valves, Comp Cams XE262H, Griffen alum. radiator,
Turbine Technologies 2500 stall converter, underdrive pulleys, Crane Hi-6 & more.
1.05g skidpad verified.
Best of 14.039 at 100.82 MPH in Stanton, MI
New! 275-40-ZR17 tires on ROH ZS 17 x 9.5's