Quote:
Originally Posted by kwood9000
Haven't seen confirmation that the original pulley is balanced. There has been conjecture that it doesn't need to be since the boxer engine doesn't have the same kind of vibrations that other types of engines have.
|
OE pulley is cast iron, with a elastomeric damper method. You dont doubt that do u?
no. (and I dont mean this personally, k?)
so. read the links, and you will see the confirmation you need... again with semantics of balanced vs not. its not the
pulley that is in balance, its the whole
system. crank. pulley, crank, flywheel, the whole kaboodle.
I know perrin or agency has no data on torsional vibration characteristics that change. Its a piece of 6061 cnc'd down as light as they can get it without breaking or flexing to a point of fatigue. I'd sooner lighten a flywheel than a crank, its just different scales of change of weight
I dont doubt that a lightened flywheel has the same result on the way harmonics get transmitted, put into standing waves, and combine frequencies that accelerate fatigue.
I also do not doubt that taking all this weight of can make you faster.
why prove or disprove if the pulley is a balanced or not? the education I shared was for your benefit, not to argue a point, theres nothing moot here. lighter is faster.
If you took the time to read the link, you would know that that opposite (180 degrees) the cranks other counterweight, the flywheel, is where the angular torsional nvh ends up that they have countered--> there is a reason the engineers put a disc weigh x.xx lbs there. but you dont have to agree with me or the links posted. I am glad that if I ever choose to, there are many folk who have run pulleys, and flywheels with no issue
I do not doubt ther are many happy folks running lightweight pulleys. I really want to buy one, but I cant make a physics case for it; and there are many engineering reasons its mod I will not be doing. Just sharing so you can make an educated choice too.
