follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Delicious Tuning
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > Technical Topics > Tracking / Autocross / HPDE / Drifting

Tracking / Autocross / HPDE / Drifting What these cars were built for!


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-25-2020, 07:30 PM   #1
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Fluidampr harmonic damper - for race/track only use - Experiences?

I know some NA street/HPDE, and FI guys use these, and they are particularly beneficial at the low Frequency/RPM spectrum, and offer broad dampening without a need for a specific tune region, but who out here is racing with one? Or at the track long-term with a Fluidampr?

I bought one and it's been installed from the very first time my car went to a track, but upon a lot more in depth digging, it seems that the Fluidampr is actually worse than the OE damper at controlling high frequency, high RPM vibrations. These are the worse kind to have because they happen more frequently and affect crank driven components like timing and oil pump components, etc. Lower order/frequency vibrations aren't as damaging a they don't happen as often, as can clearly be seen that the OE damper is concerned with controlling those, for long-term health of the motor.

My car only sees the track, so their marketing data regarding the lower frequency, and lower RPM vibrations don't have much meaning to me, as the vast majority my RPM's are 5000-7500.

I'm not interested in the underdriven ATI, so I'm seriously considering re-installing a new OE damper for better long term high RPM dampening.

Even their own data clearly shows the OE controls vibrations better in high frequency, which is why they decided to compare it to the undamped, lightweight pulley for marketing purposes. Not bashing the product, I own one, and think it works, but for a more specific use, like full time track, I'm beginning to think this may not be the best option.

The other part of the equation is the LWFW, that virtually all of run. It's known that using a lighter flywheel can shift some vibrations to a higher frequency, and while it's not a huge concern with our boxer motor, using a "heavier" lightweight flywheel may also be beneficial. I'm actually going to replacing my ACT "streetlite" setup with an Exedy LWFW/Sachs clutch, which is about 1lb heavier, to also help provide more dampening.

Feedback or experiences are welcomed, I can't seem to find many discussions on this topic.
Attached Images
  
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos

prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 07:00 AM   #2
why?
Only happy when it rains.
 
why?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: series.blue
Location: Harnett county NC
Posts: 1,995
Thanks: 5,698
Thanked 1,263 Times in 749 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
The problem I have with fluidampr is they have never told anyone what type of vibrations will actually damage the car. Is that because they have zero clue and have never tested for it, or because everything they say is total garbage?
why? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 09:42 AM   #3
SuperTom
Senior Member
 
SuperTom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Drives: C5 Corvette, '17 Toyota 86, Jeep XJ
Location: New Castle DE
Posts: 1,500
Thanks: 1,433
Thanked 914 Times in 528 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I thought the consensus was that the Fluidampr were better for cars that stay in the high RPM range vs. something like a lightweight pulley. I have no personal experience with the Fluidampr
SuperTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 10:02 AM   #4
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by why? View Post
The problem I have with fluidampr is they have never told anyone what type of vibrations will actually damage the car. Is that because they have zero clue and have never tested for it, or because everything they say is total garbage?
They do, but you have to read their comments closely to see it, and they actually tested it very thoroughly, more thoroughly than any other company out there that I can see. But, while their results show improvements in lower frequency, their summary data does try to avoid the discussion of the high frequency increase over OE. Perhaps they deem the increase isn't enough to worry about, for daily drivers, but for a race car that lives in that region, perhaps it's worth a closer look. I would have to think this product is marketed toward the masses, so that would primarily be targeted toward the street/track enthusiast who mods and drives it in stop-go traffic. So perhaps that's why they deem this product to be a big success over the OE damper, as it does cover a more broad range of vibration, but in the most critical region, it's slightly worse. Is that enough to worry about, I don't know, and that's what I'm trying to figure out.

All vibrations are somewhat bad, but the high frequency ones are typically the worst. The higher the frequency/order, the more times they are felt in each revolution/RPM, which is why they can be destructive.

I wasn't able to see/find this data at the time I bought one, and I reached out to them for input specific to this, but haven't heard back.
I've already ordered a new OE damper and plan to install and test and see if my butt dyno can feel less vibration at high RPM.
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos


Last edited by prandelia; 02-26-2020 at 10:28 AM.
prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 10:36 AM   #5
RayRay88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Drives: 2017 86 860 Special Edition
Location: Toronto
Posts: 559
Thanks: 198
Thanked 461 Times in 241 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
High RPM engine failure could be a due to a million and one things, it's going to be nearly impossible to trace it back to the Fluidampr, that is to say if it is the culprit.

Honestly I don't even get why people change their crank pulleys. Unless you're building some 9000rpm high rev/NA screamer, pushing the rotating assembly to its absolute limit, the OEM pulley should suffice.
RayRay88 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RayRay88 For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-26-2020), DarkPira7e (02-26-2020), Icecreamtruk (02-26-2020), jrhudson (05-13-2021), ls1ac (02-26-2020)
Old 02-26-2020, 11:06 AM   #6
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayRay88 View Post
High RPM engine failure could be a due to a million and one things, it's going to be nearly impossible to trace it back to the Fluidampr, that is to say if it is the culprit.

Honestly I don't even get why people change their crank pulleys. Unless you're building some 9000rpm high rev/NA screamer, pushing the rotating assembly to its absolute limit, the OEM pulley should suffice.
By no means am I saying the Fluidampr will cause failure, I don't think it will, I'm just wondering if the OE damper is the better long-term solution for a track/race-only car (assuming it is also replaced as needed to ensure optimum performance)......that answer isn't easy to get, but certainly an educated decision can be made if the information can be accurately waded through. I know the fluid dampers have a longer service life, I don't care about that, as I would be fine replacing a $100 damper every few years.

This is where help from Fluidampr would be very nice. If they simply confirmed that the level of high frequency vibration from their damper is still nothing to worry about, compared to OE, and that the bigger benefit is from controlling the ignition/harmonic vibrations in the lower frequencies still applies to a race car, then I could live with it. I'm waiting for an answer from them....lol
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos

prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 01:07 PM   #7
why?
Only happy when it rains.
 
why?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: series.blue
Location: Harnett county NC
Posts: 1,995
Thanks: 5,698
Thanked 1,263 Times in 749 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayRay88 View Post
High RPM engine failure could be a due to a million and one things, it's going to be nearly impossible to trace it back to the Fluidampr, that is to say if it is the culprit.

Honestly I don't even get why people change their crank pulleys. Unless you're building some 9000rpm high rev/NA screamer, pushing the rotating assembly to its absolute limit, the OEM pulley should suffice.

Because a lightweight crank pulley is a difference you can actually feel. Just like a lightweight clutch is something that you can actually easily tell the difference.


I agree with you that if there ever is damage it would be almost impossible to tell where it came from. That is my problem with the advertising scheme of fluidampr. They throw up a wall of data without ever stating they have proven any of it has ever caused any actual damage.


If they have tested and found actual damage done to a car because of vibration, they haven't given any proof of that. Meanwhile Subaru states their boxer engines are internally balanced and need no actual harmonic damper.
why? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 02:26 PM   #8
DarkPira7e
Rust bucket enthusiast
 
DarkPira7e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Drives: 2013 Turbo Firestorm FRS
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,926
Thanks: 3,196
Thanked 4,093 Times in 2,044 Posts
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by why? View Post
Because a lightweight crank pulley is a difference you can actually feel. Just like a lightweight clutch is something that you can actually easily tell the difference.


I agree with you that if there ever is damage it would be almost impossible to tell where it came from. That is my problem with the advertising scheme of fluidampr. They throw up a wall of data without ever stating they have proven any of it has ever caused any actual damage.


If they have tested and found actual damage done to a car because of vibration, they haven't given any proof of that. Meanwhile Subaru states their boxer engines are internally balanced and need no actual harmonic damper.
Lies are the best value adders in most industries. Bring something up as a potential issue and say that you've addressed it. Instant street cred!

Really though, I hate to be a cynic, but I agree with this. Whether smooth is better, or if the harshness does/does not cause issues is the real question. DOES it make things smoother? yes. Is that better for the engine's reliability? Who the hell knows. But it's smoother.

It's like grain-free pet food. Pets have been eating grain filled dry food for ages and generally are just as well off. But GRAIN FREE somehow is suddenly great, and having grain in the food is worse. Because it is worse. is it better for them? Who knows. It doesn't have grains in it so it's "better" somehow because it's different
DarkPira7e is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DarkPira7e For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-26-2020), jrhudson (05-13-2021), why? (02-28-2020)
Old 02-26-2020, 02:59 PM   #9
RayRay88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Drives: 2017 86 860 Special Edition
Location: Toronto
Posts: 559
Thanks: 198
Thanked 461 Times in 241 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by why? View Post
Because a lightweight crank pulley is a difference you can actually feel. Just like a lightweight clutch is something that you can actually easily tell the difference.


I agree with you that if there ever is damage it would be almost impossible to tell where it came from. That is my problem with the advertising scheme of fluidampr. They throw up a wall of data without ever stating they have proven any of it has ever caused any actual damage.


If they have tested and found actual damage done to a car because of vibration, they haven't given any proof of that. Meanwhile Subaru states their boxer engines are internally balanced and need no actual harmonic damper.
Is the fluidampr not heavier than the stock pulley?

Perhaps @CSG Mike can chime in on the fluidampr in a race/sustained high rpm environment, afaik he's had it on his car for awhile now.
RayRay88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2020, 04:18 PM   #10
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayRay88 View Post
Is the fluidampr not heavier than the stock pulley?

Perhaps @CSG Mike can chime in on the fluidampr in a race/sustained high rpm environment, afaik he's had it on his car for awhile now.
It is heavier by about 1lb, but it's rotating inertia weight due to the floating internal design makes it 3.8lbs.

I guess the better question is, looking at the data I've provided, is controlling the 3rd order vibration, and the net gain of the Fluidampr in that region, more beneficial than just the slight increase in vibration in the 6th order regions?

It's easy to look at a graph and make assumptions, and in reality these number may all still be very reasonable for long-term engine health. I'm just wondering which one is best recommended for road racing.....ask 3 vendors and you'll get 3 different answers. lol
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos

prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to prandelia For This Useful Post:
why? (02-28-2020)
Old 02-26-2020, 04:21 PM   #11
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I just got off the phone with somebody at Fluidampr, they told me the control of the higher peak/amplitude angle vibration in the 3rd order is of more value/importance. Now I can understand that case to be made, as that is the actual angle of vibration on the crank.

With the supposed tight bearing clearances these motors have, I assume control of any large torsional vibration areas may be of the greatest value. But they also conceded that their damper can't do everything for this application and it begins to shed off it's high frequency control a bit more than OEM. I can only assume it's due to weight and the frequency this one is more tuned for. I'm guessing they could probably design one more for high RPM as well, but didn't have that discussion yet.

Good discussion, however they didn't fully answer my questions, they just pointed to the biggest delta in the graph and said it was the best.

I can also see how this damper may be a good choice if you decide to run a lightweight flywheel as well, as it may have the more broad ability to dampen the shift in harmonics it cause over the OE one.
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos


Last edited by prandelia; 02-26-2020 at 05:47 PM.
prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to prandelia For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-26-2020), MJones_RB (10-15-2020), why? (02-28-2020)
Old 02-27-2020, 10:58 AM   #12
Goingnowherefast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Drives: AP2 S2000, 91 Miata 1.8L Rotrex 5MT
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 465
Thanks: 275
Thanked 299 Times in 187 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I'll give this a shot. I'm a project engineer with ~2 years in Powertrain NVH. If I don't answer anything directly, feel free to ask individual questions. But here's my general breakdown of the data, and some questions mentioned.

Disclaimer:

I have a couple minor issues with the way the data was acquired. Firstly, optical tachos are seldom used in the industry for torsional vibrations. This is because Encoder/CDM's are by far the most precise in terms of pulses per rotation. Optical tachos are used because they are cheap, and easy to use but they have quite bad precision - because of this, take their results with a grain of salt. Additionally, torsional vibrations are highest at low engine speeds. To tell the whole story, I would have liked them to start the speed sweep at 1,500 rpm instead of 2,500 rpm.


1. In general, the FA20 has fairly low 2nd order (and it's harmonics I.E 4th, 6th) torsional vibration content compared to most 4 stroke, 4 cylinder engines. Normally, most modern 2.0L inline 4 cylinder engines seem to be around ~2 degree peak to peak at 2,500 rpm (that's 1 degree peak). So, in that sense, the FA20 has an advantage over traditional inline 4 cylinder engines.

2. It's impossible to know exactly what will harm "X" component unless you do extensive durability/NVH testing on each component - something that a company like Fluidampr will never do. However, in general, it's safe to say that high frequency content tends to be more detrimental to longevity since the energy content is higher - but this is a generalization, not the law.

3. Based on the order plots, I would conclude that the OEM elastomer damper is well tuned to attenuate 2nd order content at high engine speeds. However, I wish they would release the data of order content vs. frequency spectrum, which would give us a wider picture of what's really going on. The viscous damper seems to do a much better job at damping 2nd, and 3rd order content at low-middle engine speeds.

My thoughts:

While I have a few issues with how the data was acquired and presented, I understand it's a small aftermarket company and releasing data like this in any capacity speaks volumes. To me, the OEM elastomer damper is well tuned to attenuate 2nd order (and it's harmonics) content. This coupled with the very low peak torsional content that the FA20 radiates tells me that there's certainly no reason to believe going to a Fluidampr would give you any noticeable positive impact on longterm durability of components (especially oil pump) on a stock rotating assembly.

However, as mentioned, the main advantage of viscous dampers is their ability to damp a very broad frequency spectrum. Changing to a lightweight flywheel, or changing the rotating assembly is where a Fluidampr would benefit. Simply changing to a lightweight flywheel will have a massive impact on crankshaft torsionals on it's own. This is where the broadband frequency damping of the Fluidampr would show it's own. I would definitely recommend a Fluidampr when you have either modified the rotating assembly, or have changed to a lightweight flywheel.

As far as power goes, I think those results speak for themselves. The reduced effective rotating mass certainly frees up a tiny bit of power. I'd also like to add that the lightweight crank pulley that they tested did quite poorly. I'd really recommend not using a traditional lightweight pulley on the FA20.

Feel free to ask any questions you have!
__________________
2022 Hyundai Elantra N 6MT SCCA TT S3//Will be back in an 86 eventually

Last edited by Goingnowherefast; 02-27-2020 at 12:36 PM.
Goingnowherefast is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Goingnowherefast For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-27-2020), fika84 (02-27-2020), Jyn (02-28-2020), MJones_RB (10-15-2020), why? (02-28-2020)
Old 02-27-2020, 12:46 PM   #13
StraightOuttaCanadaEh
Wes
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Drives: Artisan Spirits '17 86
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,792
Thanks: 1,163
Thanked 1,673 Times in 993 Posts
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goingnowherefast View Post
I'd really recommend not using a traditional lightweight pulley on the FA20.

Feel free to ask any questions you have!
What is a traditional lightweight pulley and what is the opposite? Thanks!
__________________
Instagram: @gt86ws
StraightOuttaCanadaEh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 12:52 PM   #14
prandelia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Drives: 2015 FRS
Location: KY
Posts: 174
Thanks: 1
Thanked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goingnowherefast View Post
I'll give this a shot. I'm a project engineer with ~2 years in Powertrain NVH. If I don't answer anything directly, feel free to ask individual questions. But here's my general breakdown of the data, and some questions mentioned.

Disclaimer:

I have a couple minor issues with the way the data was acquired. Firstly, optical tachos are seldom used in the industry for torsional vibrations. This is because Encoder/CDM's are by far the most precise in terms of pulses per rotation. Optical tachos are used because they are cheap, and easy to use but they have quite bad precision - because of this, take their results with a grain of salt. Additionally, torsional vibrations are highest at low engine speeds. To tell the whole story, I would have liked them to start the speed sweep at 1,500 rpm instead of 2,500 rpm.


1. In general, the FA20 has fairly low 2nd order (and it's harmonics I.E 4th, 6th) torsional vibration content compared to most 4 stroke, 4 cylinder engines. Normally, most modern 2.0L inline 4 cylinder engines seem to be around ~2 degree peak to peak at 2,500 rpm (that's 1 degree peak). So, in that sense, the FA20 has an advantage over traditional inline 4 cylinder engines.

2. It's impossible to know exactly what will harm "X" component unless you do extensive durability/NVH testing on each component - something that a company like Fluidampr will never do. However, in general, it's safe to say that high frequency content tends to be more detrimental to longevity since the energy content is higher - but this is a generalization, not the law.

3. Based on the order plots, I would conclude that the OEM elastomer damper is well tuned to attenuate 2nd order content at high engine speeds. However, I wish they would release the data of order content vs. frequency spectrum, which would give us a wider picture of what's really going on. The viscous damper seems to do a much better job at damping 2nd, and 3rd order content at low-middle engine speeds.

My thoughts:

While I have a few issues with how the data was acquired and presented, I understand it's a small aftermarket company and releasing data like this in any capacity speaks volumes. To me, the OEM elastomer damper is well tuned to attenuate 2nd order (and it's harmonics) content. This coupled with the very low peak torsional content that the FA20 radiates tells me that there's certainly no reason to believe going to a Fluidampr would give you any noticeable positive impact on longterm durability of components (especially oil pump) on a stock rotating assembly.

However, as mentioned, the main advantage of viscous dampers is their ability to damp a very broad frequency spectrum. Changing to a lightweight flywheel, or changing the rotating assembly is where a Fluidampr would benefit. Simply changing to a lightweight flywheel will have a massive impact on crankshaft torsionals on it's own. This is where the broadband frequency damping of the Fluidampr would show it's own. I would definitely recommend a Fluidampr when you have either modified the rotating assembly, or have changed to a lightweight flywheel.

As far as power goes, I think those results speak for themselves. The reduced effective rotating mass certainly frees up a tiny bit of power. I'd also like to add that the lightweight crank pulley that they tested did quite poorly. I'd really recommend not using a traditional lightweight pulley on the FA20.

Feel free to ask any questions you have!
Thank you so much for your input, I'm a ChE so this is out of my wheelhouse. lol. Your thoughts are pretty spot on with Fluidamprs response this morning to my email. They also said that the amplitude of the high frequency vibrations of both OE and Fluidampr are so low, that neither are of concern. So basically then, it's a case of the fluidampr simply damping the dominant 2nd/3rd orders even better. On the race track, you will see ~4500 RPM in slower corners pretty regularly, so the benefit, based on this info seems like a reason to continue using the Fludampr. If you have a street car, or a dual duty car, then it seems like a no-brainer to use one.

I added the fluidampr originally because I installed a lightweight flywheel and it seems my reasoning for the decision was correct. So really the MOST ideal setup would be Fluidampr and OE flywheel. So it's the lightweight flywheels that are ultimately the biggest contributor to bigger vibrations, which we all already knew. I will decide to test either the OE or a slightly heavier Exedy lightweight flywheel (12.8lb), than the current ACT streetlite (11.8lb). In either case, the heavier the better as it will shift frequency lower, and even more into the hands of the fluidampr to control. I would never, ever put an undamped pulley on this car. Note, the test car they used had an OE clutch/flywheel, so it shows how much Fluidampr improves over OE components. This gives me confidence that the Fluidampr may actually be the best choice to use no matter what flywheel is chosen. This was their exact response:

"Thank you for contacting Fluidampr. I apologize for the delayed response. I was out of town on business travel and still catching up on emails. The FA20 is a very solid platform right from the OEM. The testing done in that write up is a stock car with an intake, exhaust, and very mild tune. That was to show a solid base setup. In a 4 cylinder application the 2nd order is the most harmful and destructive. Rule of thumb is half the cylinders will cause the most destruction. On the FA20 the higher orders are irrelevant.

Any time you lighten the mass such as a flywheel or lightweight pulley you are changing the engines harmonics and will see an increase in harmonics. The narrow band tuned elastomer damper for the factory cannot protect the engine efficiently with such modification as a light flywheel. More racers will choose the dual mass flywheel for longevity of a race engine, after they find that light weight is not the best option in a situation like this. A fluidampr is the best option for its broad band ability to tune out and absorb the engines harmful harmonics.

The cart tested used a stock clutch/flywheel. Our Fluidampr is broad enough to work on a vehicle with a lightweight clutch/ flywheel, I would say more than half of people running our damper use a lightweight flywheel. From what we see with our customers is that by switching to a light weight setup creates a problem (vibrations) that didn’t exist. In reality the weight savings and rev up time you would get with those lighter parts are not really that much and what you get with the added vibrations is not a real benefit.
"
__________________
'15 FRS - GLTC spec
YouTube channel race vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClU...phsppnA/videos


Last edited by prandelia; 02-27-2020 at 01:43 PM.
prandelia is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to prandelia For This Useful Post:
CSG Mike (02-27-2020), M0nk3y (02-27-2020), MJones_RB (10-15-2020), Tatsu333 (04-01-2022), Walldodger (10-27-2020)
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fluidampr Damper Pulley 571101 Sale!! Mike@CZP Engine, Exhaust, Bolt-Ons 156 06-01-2018 12:24 PM
Fluidampr Internally Balanced Damper MAPerformance Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 29 08-20-2017 10:40 PM
ATI Harmonic Dampner JJD28 Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 19 07-03-2017 05:14 AM
No Race Track Seats in Race Car Drivers Every Day Cars..!! JohnnyNight Cosmetic Modification (Interior/Exterior/Lighting) 24 10-16-2012 04:42 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.