Flywheel Suggestions

[cbrnascar0329]

i'm in the middle of swapping a b18 out of a 90 integra into my 91 crx. since i'm taking all of this out and my clutch needs replaced i've bought a clutchmaster stage 3 clutch. instead of buying bolt ons to start with since my tranny will be off i'm considering buying a lightweight flywheel. my question is which is a good one. will a flywheel off a b18c5 type r fit or should i go with an act. i've found both for very similiar prices and am not sure which is best. thanks dudes, your advice is as good as your site.....

 

[E_SolSi]

Toda makes a dope flywheel

 

[phunky.buddha]

I like my Clutchmaster's/Fidanza- it's 8 pounds, aluminum, and has a rebuildable/replaceable friction surface.

 

[sabi670]

The Fidanza flywheel is really nice. I have it on my set up. Like better than my old Zex unit. Fidanza = 8lbs, Zex = 11lbs. Only 3 lbs difference, but big difference in feel and revability (if there isn't such a word than I just invented it).

 

[D See 2]

Originally posted by Calesta@Feb 4 2003, 02:02 AM
I like my Clutchmaster's/Fidanza- it's 8 pounds, aluminum, and has a rebuildable/replaceable friction surface.

i've heard that aluminum flywheels will warp/bend under high-heat conditions... have you had or heard of any problems like this?

 

[foreignconcepts]

Originally posted by Calesta@Feb 4 2003, 02:02 AM
I like my Clutchmaster's/Fidanza- it's 8 pounds, aluminum, and has a rebuildable/replaceable friction surface.

From an engineering standpoint a flywheel with a rebuildable face would be a step in the wrong direction because of the effect of taking a second material not of the original metal to bolt to itself as a frictional plate between a carbon or organic material. A: you have 2 different alloys accepting heat at 2 tempatures cause the metals will react different. B: the second metal or alloy is bolted in a supposedly correct pattern to eliminate stress in which manner? my guess is the solid lightened flywheel would be better, you can always resurface it once or twice. besides the fact that if this is an everyday vehicle as well sometimes that extra momentum could make uphill experince less troubling. good luck

 

[SixtySecondAssassin]

Originally posted by foreignconcepts+Feb 4 2003, 12:20 PM-->

Calesta

@Feb 4 2003, 02:02 AM
I like my Clutchmaster's/Fidanza- it's 8 pounds, aluminum, and has a rebuildable/replaceable friction surface.

From an engineering standpoint a flywheel with a rebuildable face would be a step in the wrong direction because of the effect of taking a second material not of the original metal to bolt to itself as a frictional plate between a carbon or organic material. A: you have 2 different alloys accepting heat at 2 tempatures cause the metals will react different. B: the second metal or alloy is bolted in a supposedly correct pattern to eliminate stress in which manner? my guess is the solid lightened flywheel would be better, you can always resurface it once or twice. besides the fact that if this is an everyday vehicle as well sometimes that extra momentum could make uphill experince less troubling. good luck

im not disputing your points. but why then are 2 piece brake rotors used in the racing world? the same principles are involved, just on a smaller but equally important scale.

 

[cbrnascar0329]

found a fidanza lightweight flywheel in a group buy from a reputable seller for $269 shipped. good deal or bad?

 

[phunky.buddha]

$269 is a good deal.

foreignconcepts-

Coming from a mechanical engineer's viewpoint over here... I see nothing wrong with using two different materials in a high heat application, given different thermal expansion rates. Competiton brake rotors are almost always multi-piece, and the entire reason for a rotor's existence is heat dissipation... a clutch is meant to provide grip, not act as a heat sink. The clutch disc and flywheel are only acting as friction surfaces during engagement- the rest of the time they're either spinning free, or spinning together as one unit. The heat load isn't as large as the interface between the rotors and pads in your brake system.

As far as going uphill or starting from a stop, I haven't had any problems in the last 20k miles driving daily with my 8 pound flywheel. It's no big deal at all.

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

Originally posted by Calesta@Feb 5 2003, 03:35 AM
As far as going uphill or starting from a stop, I haven't had any problems in the last 20k miles driving daily with my 8 pound flywheel. It's no big deal at all.

 

[chet]

keep your stock OEM honda flywheel...and have it resurfaced and lightened to about 16lbs.

unless you're making a lot of power the loss of torque in the lower rpm's is not worth the extra money spent...in my opinion.

plus, aluminum flywheels could warp under extreme conditions...

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

Could some explain to me how lightening the flywheel causes a loss in torque? Hardcore physics terms are OK by me.

 

[phunky.buddha]

Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@Feb 5 2003, 11:25 AM
Could some explain to me how lightening the flywheel causes a loss in torque? Hardcore physics terms are OK by me.

Reduction in rotational mass... the lighter flywheel will give you less mass to accelerate, but at the same time, it reduces your rotational moment of inertia.. which reduces the amount of torque you have at any given point in time. Basically, it's less mass to push against whatever you throw at it. It allows you to speed up faster, but causes your engine to slow down faster as well. Heavier flywheels are easier to drive because the inertia helps you to start the car, keep going uphill, etc...

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

OK, well, by that rationale, increasing the weight of a flywheel will give you more torque (i.e. power at low rpm). But there has to be someplace in the middle (between the arguments of stock vs. lightened) that gives you an optimum power gain throughout the powerband. Is chet right, is Clutchmaster's right, or is there someplace else in the spectrum that hasn't been brought up? Maybe the question is somewhat rhetorical....

 

[phunky.buddha]

I don't know how the power graphs look with different flywheels... but I'm sure you can do the calculations. Lighter rotating mass means faster acceleration to me, so the lighter all your components are, the more power you'll ultimately make. That's one reason why I'm sourcing pistons that are significantly lighter than what I used to have.

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

Originally posted by Calesta@Feb 5 2003, 11:55 AM
I don't know how the power graphs look with different flywheels... but I'm sure you can do the calculations. Lighter rotating mass means faster acceleration to me, so the lighter all your components are, the more power you'll ultimately make. That's one reason why I'm sourcing pistons that are significantly lighter than what I used to have.

Yeah, it's always seemed to me that the less mass you're trying to rotate, the better.

 

[lsvtec]

The Butt dyno concurs with physics (I'll be damned). An 8 lbs Aluminum CM flywheel was the second best upgrade to my LS engine I made. I felt a significant power increase with it. I have not had any problems with my flywheel at all. It has been run for almost 10,000 miles now.
Note the operative work here

Originally posted by chet@Feb 5 2003, 10:14 AM
plus, aluminum flywheels could warp under extreme conditions

What is extreme? I certainly don't reach any extreme conditions with my LSVTEC because it hasn't warped.

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

My butt dyno concurs as well. When I did the clutch and flywheel at the same time, I definitely FELT some power gains. Plus, there's nothing like going through first gear in like three-quarters of second.

 

[cbrnascar0329]

that's it, decision has been made. fidanza it is for $259 not $269. even better deal. thanks fella's.

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

Werd, let us know how you like it after the install. Doing a clutch with it?