Lightweight crank pulley vs OEM vs Fluidampr by MotoIQ

[seant2h]

Originally Posted by why?

I wasn't expecting to see anything. I was pointing out the reality that there are no people on the planet that I've ever talked to or read that would take 1 dyno run and even think about reporting what it said as fact.

I was also pointing out this paid review cannot be used as evidence of anything at all, because there was no real test, and there was no real comparison.

It is disingenuous at best to try and use it as proof of anything at all. It does nothing to further our knowledge base about anything.



It is real data that says there is no statistical difference whatsoever between the three pulleys and nothing more. Not data you can draw any conclusions from.

And if a person can get consistent repeatable runs on a dyno then the data can be considered valid. No one will ever be able to perfectly repeat everything, which is why 2 or 3 hp is usually considered to be no gain at all.

The fact remains that no matter how much data and testing anyone wants to use to prove either side of this topic, it will not change the laws of physics which I dare anyone to try and disprove. If you don't understand the laws of physics then go get a book or ask a question.

[why?]

Originally Posted by seant2h

The fact remains that no matter how much data and testing anyone wants to use to prove either side of this topic, it will not change the laws of physics which I dare anyone to try and disprove. If you don't understand the laws of physics then go get a book or ask a question.

What's your point? I'm not even going to go into the arrogance of the human race here, but if you are saying there is no test possible that could ever give any data, you might as well just dump all science ever.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by stugray

replace it with a ZERO pound magic pulley.

link, please

[seant2h]

Originally Posted by why?

What's your point? I'm not even going to go into the arrogance of the human race here, but if you are saying there is no test possible that could ever give any data, you might as well just dump all science ever.

My point is that there is a bigger picture here (physics) that some people are failing to account for because everyone just wants to see a dyno to prove the point. If you study the physics of what we are talking about here then it becomes clear that no dyno run will matter because Newton's laws of physics will be relevant until proven otherwise.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by seant2h

If you study the physics of what we are talking about here then it becomes clear that no dyno run will matter [1] because Newton's laws of physics will be relevant until proven otherwise.[2]

1/ As I mentioned above it depends on the type of dyno being used. I am not suggesting changing the crank pulley would make a difference in reading. I am suggesting if one removed significant rotational mass in the drive train (flywheel,drive shaft and wheels) one would see an increase in power if one was using an inertia dyno. Is this increase real? According to the dyno it is. It is just the way inertia dynos works.
2/ I don't think people are arguing the physics; I think people are arguing the significance of changing the mass of just the crank pulley. @stugray's calculation showed that if you reduced drive train inertia you get a benefit. Because physics. It also showed just how insignificant that benefit was.

[chaoskaze]

Why are u guys using crank shaft as example... All that does is decrease the drivetrain lost.. So u get more whp but ur engine still makes the same power...O.O

[stugray]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

2/ I don't think people are arguing the physics; I think people are arguing the significance of changing the mass of just the crank pulley. @stugray's calculation showed that if you reduced drive train inertia you get a benefit. Because physics. It also showed just how insignificant that benefit was.

My calculation did not say anything about measuring HP on a dyno.


It was specifically aimed at the argument that a lightweight driveline component might give you an advantage in a 0-100 MPH drag race.
In THAT case I showed that two identical cars, side by side, but one has a magic driveshaft that has the same weight as the other car, but "Magically" has a rotational inertia of ZERO, would make it to 100 MPH 32 milliseconds faster than the car with a driveshaft with "stock rotational inertia".


You STILL wont see a difference on a dyno.


I'll ask another (related) question:
When we look at dyno graphs do we EVER look at how many seconds it took the car to reach max RPM?


Seconds is nowhere to be found on a dyno sheet. (that I have noticed).

[Ultramaroon]

He AGREES with you.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

Why are u guys using crank shaft as example... All that does is decrease the drivetrain lost.. So u get more whp but ur engine still makes the same power...O.O

Yes, pointed out before. You aren't providing new knowledge.

ESL?

[stugray]

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

He AGREES with you.

I was agreeing with his agreement, adding a caveat, and asking a totally new question, related, but a distant cousin...twice removed.

[chaoskaze]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Yes, pointed out before. You aren't providing new knowledge.



ESL?

And you are? 😂 How about just hold your D & go play in private. Thank you. Fact is no one in this thread is gonna provide new knowledge but shoot loads off each other in an endless debut. 👍

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by chaoskaze

And you are? 😂 How about just hold your D & go play in private. Thank you. Fact is no one in this thread is gonna provide new knowledge but shoot loads off each other in an endless debut. 👍

I just might, it feels good.

[Captain Snooze]

Oh look!! It's the internet!!

[ka-t_240]

So, would you think a product like the fluidampr is something that will help with longivity on these cars as it appear the common failure is starting to be the bearings?