Mopar Muscle Association UK

Anybody running a lightweight flywheel? Pro's cons? Your thoughts gents please!!

I am in my mk1 escort, makes the car feel much more alive, revs quicker. No real down side from my point of view but the car is a manual; not sure what would happen with an auto car.

ARP bolts hold mine on in case it decides to exit at 8500 rpm

J

Not in a V8 I havn't. Flywheels are heavy for a reason, they store inertia. That provides a smooth idle at low revs and a smooth pull away without dragging the engine down. A lighter flywheel will need a higher idle speed and a higher RPM when pulling away to avoid stalling. they are best suited to light high revving cars, I would imagine it would be a downright pain in the arse in a heavy road car. Back in the day when the 4 speed was king on the strip, the heavy cars actually used a heavier than stock flywheel for a faster launch.

One of my motorcycles has a lighter flywheel and yes it spins up more quickly and down-shifts are easier, but it results in lots of gear changing and far reduced torque......

Pete wrote:far reduced torque......

?!

How can that be? Maybe a tad but not much more.

As Blue said - less energy is stored....the bike is now an 1100cc V Twin that is a screamer, nothing below 3000 rpm.......redlines at 8000, let's see a Harley do that!!

...autos don't have flywheels..........

Pretty much what I thought.....and B bodies aren't the lightest of cars!

No, I think you'd find it a miserable experience. I had one in my 1600 Anglia when I was a kid worked fine in that, light car revvy engine. That was also my first experience of a full race solid disc clutch on the steet, chattered like crazy and destroyed itself very quickly.