Reply to "Flywheel Mass vs. Acceleration"

You have to try the aluminum flywheel to understand but I am not a believer in them.

A stock Cleveland is probably marginal for one. Something like a 427, sure it will help.

I prefer to lighten the reciprocating assembly internally and use a steel flywheel.

As it turned out, the piston that was available for my 347 engine, a Keith Black, weighed 368 g and the pin 102 g, vs 528 and 160 g for the stock pin.

That right there gave the engine the same acceleration rate as the aluminum flywheel but the engine doesn't have the tendency of stalling when you try to engage the clutch in first gear like it will with an aluminum flywheel.

That and a 3.27 first gear and a 3.50 rear gear gives the accelleration of something like a 5.00:1 would in a Pantera.

The nose of the car really comes up on acceleration.



I feel you NEED the inertia of the steel flywheel. I'm sure others will disagree but I can never get accustomed to them.

"We" currently have an aluminum flywheel installed in a 3.0 liter supercharged Contour SVT and if you ask me, it sucks.

I have to slip the clutch like crazy to make it move without stalling it in first gear.



Another thought that I had is that removing the mass of the steel flywheel is removing virtually all of the engine vibration dampening on that end of the crankshaft.

The Cleveland LIKES the heavy dampening in particular. For some reason it produces a destructive harmonic over 6,000 rpm.

The only way I know to get that under control is with the external weights of the flywheel and the balancer.

It seems to be more important for the balance to have the added mass. I don't know why.

Just my opinion. I am not the expert on this or anything else for that matter.