If lightweight flywheels are so good and useful why don't manufuckturers implement it in the first place?
>>28109304More vibrations and more noise
less smootheasier to stall
>>28109334>>28109336>>28109353Thank you. But I thought it would consume way less fuel on lower rpm's
>>28109358Understand that a flywheels purpose is in part to keep the engine rotating when in between power pulses, once up to speed the engine doesn't need to spend as much fuel to keep itself rotating since the mass of the flywheel keeps it spinning and offsets frictional losses. If you lighten the flywheel then that puts more onus on the engine to keep itself rotating, and maintain idle speed, therefore more fuel needs to be burned.
I have a question. What if you put a heavier flywheel on? Can that help smooth the idle if you sit in your truck all day?
>>28109414Yes, but your acceleration is going to be horseshit.
>>28109304They do, the ap1 s2000 came with an 11lbs flywheel. People hated it and it went to 22lbs in the ap2.
>>28109414Not a flywheel, but a harmonic damper on the front surely will.
>>28109358No, the weight of the flywheel is inconsequential compared to the weight of the car...
>>28109304their only purpose is to make the motor wrap faster, it's not a outright improvement because now you loose streetability by reducing the rotating mass.
>>28109304A) Makes it harder to get off the lineB) It's only useful for shifting if you're shifting hard and fast, if you're shifting casually it's actually annoying because the revs drop before your ready to let the clutch out and you have to give the throttle an extra blip if you want it to be smoothBut It does feel good if you've got a turbo when you first come on boost and the engine just perks up instantly.
>>28109374My boy you don't understand conservation of momentum. Lightening the flywheel doesn't mean the engine has to work harder to maintain rpm. It means the engine has to work less to increase rpm
>>28110511Alright the put a piece of paper on the back of it and see how well it functions. The weight on the back is still pushing against frictional losses of the pistons, vacuum its pulling, friction on the bearings and gaps in power pulses, the heavier the flywheel the more of that is negated. That is what the engine fighting against more with a lighter flywheel dumbass.
>>28112133>The weight on the back is still pushing against frictional losses of the pistons, vacuum its pulling, friction on the bearingsNone of which is affected by changing the flywheel. That resistance is unchanged, which is the point you're missing. >the heavier the flywheel the more of that is negated.Nope. The flywheel just provides rotational inertia and the engine has to work harder to spin it faster. If flywheels added resistance then you'd have a point but they don't. Did ya ever wonder why race cars have light flywheels?? Derrrrp
>>28109414Maybe, but a lot of tradeoffs. Better move would be to bump up the idle, even just 50 rpm can make a world of difference.
>>28112477>Did ya ever wonder why race cars have light flywheels?? DerrrrpEver wonder why Racecars with light or even no flywheels have high idles? You clearly can't put two and two together.
>>28109304because the flywheel mass affects spin-up load and spin-down time, most people don't want a really snappy rev time in either direction
>>28113129>Smaller flywheels require the engine to idle higher so therefore driving with one consumes more gasGee whiz, nice logic. Totally makes sense, thanks for putting it together for me. Nevermind that modern cars have auto start so you don't have to sit and idle for more than a second. High quality point, bro. Deerrrpppp
>>28109304They are less Street friendly.I run an aluminum LS7 flywheel, and it's amazing for racing.the RPM it frees up is crazy.revves up so damn fast.but requires a lot more gas and a slower clutch release from a dead stop that's why OEMs run Dual mass flywheels.hard to stall a DM flywheel.
