ATS carbon clutch collaboration model prototype clutch 86 & BRZ

[kanundrum]

From the Luck Blog


Is pleased with whether there are more are accessible to the surprised and tripling was out of the articles 86 & BRZ yesterday but I am pleased with getting many blog access has recently shown interest in this car only this I! Also today, I Yurushite topic · car so I'm sorry neta in an additional 86 & BRZ
This is the clutch.
Ones come with the launch of ATS's future is under construction specifications for the rack with a different spec is a carbon clutch which he also currently developing in San ATS.
While asking for more ease of riding, we are currently under development in the content enough to withstand even sports driving.

Response can be up more in the lightweight flywheel, you should be able to deliver the clutch sport full marks degree easy to ride as much as possible while holding the judder.

(Including tax) ¥ 168.000 tentative
If you have completed, so early reservation special prices also served, it welcomes inquiries from everyone.








Also Pulley Work




Is in development for various pulley 86 and the BRZ.
For now, the heaviest crank is, of course, alternator and power steering also for work in progress, the launch of the car is makeshift.
I tell you the price as soon as complete

The image (s) · · · ¥ 33.000 is set for GRB

[7thgear]

over in subaru land, the discussions of lightweight crank pullies combined with lightweight flywheels are never ending and never definitive

i wonder what the consensus will be over on this side :/

[kanundrum]

haha.

[Snaps]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

over in subaru land, the discussions of lightweight crank pullies combined with lightweight flywheels are never ending and never definitive.

As there are quite a few people here that understand a decent amount of physics, I'd say the consensus should be clear - they ARE better, but the weight saving is not worth the money you spend for them (referring to LW pulleys. LW flywheels are a different story)...

[7thgear]

see, it has begun

[mines13]

Rotating assemblies are expensive, why risk it on an over rev? I will never understand this light weight pulley crap, the rotational mass is focused toward the hub vs the radius of the pulley anyway. If you really want to drop rotational mass off of your crankshaft/rotating assembly install a light weight flywheel and leave the stock pulley alone. Only an ATi damper could be considered an upgrade.



I have also run an ATS carbon twin plate in a car before. It was pretty horrible, forget launching the car unless you put a ton of heat in it by slipping it first. Wait for OS Giken to release a super single. The most streetable basket clutches on the market by far.

[serialk11r]

Is it true that very lightweight flywheels are almost undriveable on the street? In that case, a lightweight pulley would be completely useless if you can shave off a tiny bit of mass from the flywheel.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Is it true that very lightweight flywheels are almost undriveable on the street? In that case, a lightweight pulley would be completely useless if you can shave off a tiny bit of mass from the flywheel.

A light weight flywheel reduces inertia. This means that the engine will have less mass to overcome to accelerate (improve transient response) but will also lose revs faster between gears for the same reason. You may need to rev your engine a little higher and be faster/smoother when you shift to compensate for the faster drop in engine speed. I have done light weight flywheels on pretty much every car I have owned, and will continue to do so because the downsides, for me at least, do not out weight the advantages.

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Is it true that very lightweight flywheels are almost undriveable on the street? In that case, a lightweight pulley would be completely useless if you can shave off a tiny bit of mass from the flywheel.

Yeah it does depend on the weight, for many cars there are several versions of lightweight flywheels with different weights. A full race lightened flywheel thats nearly 50-60% lighter than factory is completely unforgivable on the street.

lightweight pullies arnt useless.. you really have to look at the application. Some crank pullies for many cars are stupid heavy and can use some lightening.

[serialk11r]

What I was getting at was that the overall moment of inertia of the engine comes from the pulleys, crank, and flywheel together. If the flywheel mass has a lower limit due to driveability, then there's not much of a point in switching pulleys because why subtract rotational inertia from 2 places (flywheel and pulley) when you can just subtract it from 1 (flywheel). The mass removed from the flywheel will have a much larger effect, and if you can just replace the flywheel to get the desired effect, there's no need to shave mass from the pulleys when you can just shave a little off the flywheel (I think machining flywheels a little is safe practice right?)

[7thgear]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

What I was getting at was that the overall moment of inertia of the engine comes from the pulleys, crank, and flywheel together. If the flywheel mass has a lower limit due to driveability, then there's not much of a point in switching pulleys because why subtract rotational inertia from 2 places (flywheel and pulley) when you can just subtract it from 1 (flywheel). The mass removed from the flywheel will have a much larger effect, and if you can just replace the flywheel to get the desired effect, there's no need to shave mass from the pulleys when you can just shave a little off the flywheel (I think machining flywheels a little is safe practice right?)

this is the general consensus at the subie forums..

however it really is a preference thing, clutch type also matters

rule #1, find someone with your car who has done a light flywheel and ask for a ride along.

a good friend of mine upgraded to some super heavy duty clutch and hated every moment since. Sure it may hold down his power during a launch, but what about the other 99.9% of the time driving on the roads

[Mr.Jay]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

this is the general consensus at the subie forums..

however it really is a preference thing, clutch type also matters

rule #1, find someone with your car who has done a light flywheel and ask for a ride along.

a good friend of mine upgraded to some super heavy duty clutch and hated every moment since. Sure it may hold down his power during a launch, but what about the other 99.9% of the time driving on the roads

I find that with any mod on a DD. Do the pros of the mod outweight the cons for DDing

[mines13]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

What I was getting at was that the overall moment of inertia of the engine comes from the pulleys, crank, and flywheel together. If the flywheel mass has a lower limit due to driveability, then there's not much of a point in switching pulleys because why subtract rotational inertia from 2 places (flywheel and pulley) when you can just subtract it from 1 (flywheel). The mass removed from the flywheel will have a much larger effect, and if you can just replace the flywheel to get the desired effect, there's no need to shave mass from the pulleys when you can just shave a little off the flywheel (I think machining flywheels a little is safe practice right?)

Yes, this would be a safer approach and provide a greater felt effect.

[Exage]

Originally Posted by mines13

A light weight flywheel reduces inertia. This means that the engine will have less mass to overcome to accelerate (improve transient response) but will also lose revs faster between gears for the same reason. You may need to rev your engine a little higher and be faster/smoother when you shift to compensate for the faster drop in engine speed. I have done light weight flywheels on pretty much every car I have owned, and will continue to do so because the downsides, for me at least, do not out weight the advantages.

Tach can't keep pace if there is no load...

[u2b]AVktH3nS6D0[/u2b]

As much as I would like to have that flywheel, my driving simply takes me through to many altitude changes during daily driving for it to be worth while.

[old greg]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

What I was getting at was that the overall moment of inertia of the engine comes from the pulleys, crank, and flywheel together. If the flywheel mass has a lower limit due to driveability, then there's not much of a point in switching pulleys because why subtract rotational inertia from 2 places (flywheel and pulley) when you can just subtract it from 1 (flywheel). The mass removed from the flywheel will have a much larger effect, and if you can just replace the flywheel to get the desired effect, there's no need to shave mass from the pulleys when you can just shave a little off the flywheel (I think machining flywheels a little is safe practice right?)

For a street car, yeah, there's no point in having both. But that doesn't make a lightweight pulley a waste of money. It is a pretty inexpensive and straightforward mod, and the stock pulley is not a harmonic damper so there's no reliability issues to worry about. For someone looking for a small change for not a lot of hassle, it's not a bad idea.

If you are super concerned with weight reduction though, a lightweight pulley with a not-quite-as-light-as-it-could-be flywheel will save a couple of pounds versus just a lightened flywheel.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

Yeah it does depend on the weight, for many cars there are several versions of lightweight flywheels with different weights. A full race lightened flywheel thats nearly 50-60% lighter than factory is completely unforgivable on the street.

lightweight pullies arnt useless.. you really have to look at the application. Some crank pullies for many cars are stupid heavy and can use some lightening.

Flawed logic. The mass and diameter of an OEM pulley is calculated to counter the negative harmonic effects on the rotating assembly a higher engine speeds. This is not a matter of a "stupid heavy and can use some lightening" It is what the manufacture determined was necessary to counter these negative and potentially damaging effects for the particular engine.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by old greg

For a street car, yeah, there's no point in having both. But that doesn't make a lightweight pulley a waste of money. It is a pretty inexpensive and straightforward mod, and the stock pulley is not a harmonic damper so there's no reliability issues to worry about. For someone looking for a small change for not a lot of hassle, it's not a bad idea.

If you are super concerned with weight reduction though, a lightweight pulley with a not-quite-as-light-as-it-could-be flywheel will save a couple of pounds versus just a lightened flywheel.

An inline four engine is not balanced with the pulley, this is true. The mass of a factory pulley however does help counter crank flex/harmonics at higher engine speeds. Not to be confused with a self balancing damper that is typically found on a competition engine.

[old greg]

Originally Posted by mines13

Flawed logic. The mass and diameter of an OEM pulley is calculated to counter the negative harmonic effects on the rotating assembly a higher engine speeds. This is not a matter of a "stupid heavy and can use some lightening" It is what the manufacture determined was necessary to counter these negative and potentially damaging effects for the particular engine.

This is not true for the Subaru H4. The crankshaft is so short (ie: Stiff) that it's torsional natural frequency is well above anything it sees in operation.

Originally Posted by Subaru

Thank you for your patience as I checked with our Technical Services Department regarding your message below. They advised that the crank pulley is a pulley and nothing else. It is not used as a harmonic damper/balancer. Thanks for the opportunity to be of assistance. If you need any future assistance, please feel free to contact us again."

Best wishes, John J. Mergen

Customer Service Department Subaru of America, Inc.

[7thgear]

two questions in light of the above

1. if this is true, why wouldn't subaru manufacture the lightest pulleys possible at factory.


2. in light of what mines13 said

in that regard, the pulley then functions as a unit together with the flywheel, so then by that logic we shouldn't be changing the flywheel either since its mass will have an effect on the overall balance of the system.

[old greg]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

if this is true, why wouldn't subaru manufacture the lightest pulleys possible at factory.

At a wild guess, I'd say it's because of some combination of: Cost, NVH and "If it ain't broke...".

[WingsofWar]

Originally Posted by mines13

Flawed logic. The mass and diameter of an OEM pulley is calculated to counter the negative harmonic effects on the rotating assembly a higher engine speeds. This is not a matter of a "stupid heavy and can use some lightening" It is what the manufacture determined was necessary to counter these negative and potentially damaging effects for the particular engine.

does not apply to rotary as well.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by old greg

This is not true for the Subaru H4. The crankshaft is so short (ie: Stiff) that it's torsional natural frequency is well above anything it sees in operation.

I can see how this would be true in this particular application. Even at the far end of the crankshaft, away from the flywheel the distance is significantly shorter then it would be on a conventional 4+ cylinder engine. Only at an extremely level of modification would you really have to be concerned... Significantly higher engine speeds, changing the mass of the engine internals, etc.