Lwfw any one had probs

[mongo]

WTF - all this 'cos the guy cannot spell particularly well but is proud to be making a decent living anyway? If he is paying his taxes, he has my respect. Sheesh - let's move on and get back to talking cars?

Am I wrong in thinking that the point of a lightened flywheel is to reduce the effort needed by the motor to build revs (since there is less weight to rotate) therefor making the motor rev more freely, with the possible downside being that revs drop faster too? (ie. losing speed faster) Thinking logically, I cannot see why would a lightened flywheel would cause any problems elsewhere. Perhaps the design of the engine relies on the fact that there is a certain amount of weight related resistance to balance the nature of the engines components? Thoughts?

Mak.

The issue is that the flywheel is both an energy store and a damper.
The crank in our cars sees 4 pulses of acceleration every rotation.
You need the stored energy to keep the crank turning in between cylinder pulses otherwise the crank would slow down dramatically before the next combustion event due to other cylinders being compressed.
The damper aspect is that the flywheel also reduces the "peaks" of the acceleration events. So instead of the crank accelerating quickly the flywheel also smooth's things out.
Dual mass flywheel is a way of dealing with high compression engines - high compression engines like ours and diesels have proportionately larger acceleration (and deceleration) events. This would normally need a larger flywheel to cope but then this transmits a lot to the geartrain. So if the fly wheel is effectively split in two with one side connected to the crankshaft then other to the gearbox and linked with a spring damper. With the car in neutral the engine "sees" the whole flywheel mass so has a nice low steady idle. When in gear the engine "sees" only the inner mass and the transmission is damped with the outer mass meaning the engine is reasonably free to pick up speed and the transmission is damped to make it quiet.

Overall the DMF is a really elegant solution to the problem however as is pretty well documented, elegant but fragile.

A lighter single mass flywheel will obviously reduce the rotating mass of the system which has benefits. You don't want to go too light though as lighter wheels will accelerate faster but in a similar vein will also decelerate faster before the next "event".
But you do loose the gearbox damping which is why some get a degree of gearbox "chatter". You'll also need to adjust (probably by only a small amount) launch rpm as the engine will be more prone to stalling.

As for the crank? well you are putting more stress on the crank as the acceleration events will be less damped. As to say if will cause a failure? Hard to say - the crank is strong in our cars as are the bearings given the high rpm and with 8 cylinders the time between combustions is also lower than say a v6 or inline 4. I think there are now plenty of people using them for a long time without issue so I would say that it should be ok.

Answer pretty much covered above between dmf and smf.

However this thread reminded me of the good ole Harry Enfield sketch load'sa money:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXuRvthgn4U

gave me a good ole giggle, top work.

[TonyHayers]

^ Why I love this forum. Nice one ads.

[bam_bam]

The issue is that the flywheel is both an energy store and a damper.
The crank in our cars sees 4 pulses of acceleration every rotation.
You need the stored energy to keep the crank turning in between cylinder pulses otherwise the crank would slow down dramatically before the next combustion event due to other cylinders being compressed.
The damper aspect is that the flywheel also reduces the "peaks" of the acceleration events. So instead of the crank accelerating quickly the flywheel also smooth's things out.
Dual mass flywheel is a way of dealing with high compression engines - high compression engines like ours and diesels have proportionately larger acceleration (and deceleration) events. This would normally need a larger flywheel to cope but then this transmits a lot to the geartrain. So if the fly wheel is effectively split in two with one side connected to the crankshaft then other to the gearbox and linked with a spring damper. With the car in neutral the engine "sees" the whole flywheel mass so has a nice low steady idle. When in gear the engine "sees" only the inner mass and the transmission is damped with the outer mass meaning the engine is reasonably free to pick up speed and the transmission is damped to make it quiet.

Overall the DMF is a really elegant solution to the problem however as is pretty well documented, elegant but fragile.

A lighter single mass flywheel will obviously reduce the rotating mass of the system which has benefits. You don't want to go too light though as lighter wheels will accelerate faster but in a similar vein will also decelerate faster before the next "event".
But you do loose the gearbox damping which is why some get a degree of gearbox "chatter". You'll also need to adjust (probably by only a small amount) launch rpm as the engine will be more prone to stalling.

As for the crank? well you are putting more stress on the crank as the acceleration events will be less damped. As to say if will cause a failure? Hard to say - the crank is strong in our cars as are the bearings given the high rpm and with 8 cylinders the time between combustions is also lower than say a v6 or inline 4. I think there are now plenty of people using them for a long time without issue so I would say that it should be ok.

^English.... use it to explain complex sh1t.



So I see it’s going to be one of those days…

Don't claim that you have to type that way because you're lexscyid. If you've got a 20k A4 and 7k tricycle, I think you can afford a spell checker, also, no one mentioned how you paid for your cars or what your teachers said about you at school, and let's be honest, we'd all judge the fcuk out of a book if it was written in "txtspek". innit. lol.

What the f***? The guy posts and then this...

Why advise the guy to use a spell check or re-read before he posts? Clearly, the ignorance prevails. Even if he had utilised a spell check pre-cursor to posting, he's dyslexic. It's not about being be able to spell it's about not having the ability to see chracters or words that make sense or are in the correct order. If he had managed to spell check, correct accordingly and post he simply wouldn't know that it was correct, or not. That's dyslexia for you.

Only take the p*** if your'e in the ball-park...

As for the fly-wheel issues, no idea. That one has been a little overshadowed...

It's my opinion that he's being a lazy <beep> and playing the I've got lexscyia card, a spell checker would've fixed 7 out of 10 mistakes. Got a problem with my opinion?
How much tax he pays is irrelevant plus we don’t even know if he pays tax!
How many cars he has or how much money he spent on his tricycle is also irrelevant.
However, his posts are close to illegible and he makes zero effort to even deploy a simple (and in almost all cases – FREE) spell check, seeing that everyone has to look at the same page when trying to communicate on this forum, that seems very relevant. In fact, it’s pretty much common courtesy, it’d be no different to just randomly posting a question in Russian! People from all over the world post on this forum, some that probably have dyslexia AND have English as a third language and they’ve probably still made more effort than Jamie Stanton. See me waving while pissing in your ball-park?!?!?
...and now to segway, why is my piss boiling you ask? Because I’ve struggled with the condition my whole life and playing the lexscyia card is a fucken cop out, it’s pure laziness.


Bob Dylan regularly gets denied entry into restaurants, night clubs and other establishments. He’s reportedly worth $180million but he talks like a drunken fart under wet concrete and dresses like a homeless tramp, so, everyone judges him and won’t let him into their club. He doesn’t give a fcuk. He doesn’t get upset and accepts the reasons as to why he’s ostracised. Fair enough.

Jamie Stanton got mocked when posting in a forum, probably when sending emails and after filling in forms. He reportedly owns a house, a £20,000 Audi A4 and a £7,000 tricycle but few people can understand him, so, everyone judges him and sniggers behind his back (or out in the open in regards to me). He gets upset. He knows the reasons why but still makes no attempt to deploy a smidge of technology to change it. Fair game.

No brain cells were harmed in the process of writing this post but a spell checker was seriously inconvenienced.

[Jamiestanton]

thanks to you all again your info is very helpfull to me sorry there are some <beep> on here you know who your are
every eles thanks again

[bam_bam]

thanks to you all again your info is very helpfull to me sorry there are some <beep> on here you know who your are
every eles thanks again

You're most very welcome, no need to thank me.

[neilparf]

It's my opinion that he's being a lazy <beep> and playing the I've got lexscyia card, a spell checker would've fixed 7 out of 10 mistakes. Got a problem with my opinion?
How much tax he pays is irrelevant plus we don’t even know if he pays tax!
How many cars he has or how much money he spent on his tricycle is also irrelevant.
However, his posts are close to illegible and he makes zero effort to even deploy a simple (and in almost all cases – FREE) spell check, seeing that everyone has to look at the same page when trying to communicate on this forum, that seems very relevant. In fact, it’s pretty much common courtesy, it’d be no different to just randomly posting a question in Russian! People from all over the world post on this forum, some that probably have dyslexia AND have English as a third language and they’ve probably still made more effort than Jamie Stanton. See me waving while pissing in your ball-park?!?!?
...and now to segway, why is my piss boiling you ask? Because I’ve struggled with the condition my whole life and playing the lexscyia card is a fucken cop out, it’s pure laziness.


Bob Dylan regularly gets denied entry into restaurants, night clubs and other establishments. He’s reportedly worth $180million but he talks like a drunken fart under wet concrete and dresses like a homeless tramp, so, everyone judges him and won’t let him into their club. He doesn’t give a fcuk. He doesn’t get upset and accepts the reasons as to why he’s ostracised. Fair enough.

Jamie Stanton got mocked when posting in a forum, probably when sending emails and after filling in forms. He reportedly owns a house, a £20,000 Audi A4 and a £7,000 tricycle but few people can understand him, so, everyone judges him and sniggers behind his back (or out in the open in regards to me). He gets upset. He knows the reasons why but still makes no attempt to deploy a smidge of technology to change it. Fair game.

No brain cells were harmed in the process of writing this post but a spell checker was seriously inconvenienced.

Indeed, it's one of those days.

How big is your chip, old chap?

You missed my point about understanding the aftermath of employing a spell check. For the sake of brevity, here it is again: ...It's not about being be able to spell it's about not having the ability to see chracters or words that make sense or are in the correct order. If he had managed to spell check, correct accordingly and post he simply wouldn't know that it was correct, or not. That's dyslexia for you. Capeesh now? Either way...

Just because it's lazy to not to employ a spell doesn't mean he's also a '<beep>'. Furthermore, having dyslexia yourself doesn't add any credence to your point.

His posts are almost illegible. Agreed. They transpire as lazy. However, adsgreen understood them enough to weigh in with a response, now didn't he?

He asked an innocent question about a flywheel. You ripped him a new one because his verbalised post was not pigeon holed in your 'acceptably composed post for a dyslexic'. Not that you knew that when he first posted but it transpired quickly to be the case.

Bob Dylan gets denied to restaurants and night clubs? Really? You been subscribing to PopBitch again?

Why did I post my response? Because clearly the guy can't verbalise any response spell checked or not that wouldn't add fuel to your fire. That's one sided and it needed some balance, in my opinion. Got a problem with that?

Finally, do I have a problem with your opinion? Not at all it's a freeworld. I could distill your response down to the fact you have a problem with my response to your initial response, based purely on the fact that you employ a spell check (great for you) and Jamie Stanton hasn't.

Don't let that piss boil over. It'll only make a mess.

[Audi Pardner]

Back on subject, I take if that your new flywheel is an MRC-supplied one. If so, why not have a word with them about your concerns, though as has been said, I can't see that MRC would sell a problem part. I've never heard or read of anyone having the problem you describe, if that's any help

[bam_bam]

How big is your chip, old chap?

Hmmm, how long you got, young bean?

You missed my point about understanding the aftermath of employing a spell check. For the sake of brevity, here it is again: ...It's not about being be able to spell it's about not having the ability to see chracters or words that make sense or are in the correct order. If he had managed to spell check, correct accordingly and post he simply wouldn't know that it was correct, or not. That's dyslexia for you. Capeesh now? Either way...

Oh I got your point but I’ve seen way worse than Jamie turn around their writing around just by using a spell checker and start to use comparison techniques of historical writing. I'd surmise that if monetary incentive were involved, he'd be smashing it out of the park (see what I did there?)

Just because it's lazy to not to employ a spell doesn't mean he's also a '<beep>'. Furthermore, having dyslexia yourself doesn't add any credence to your point.

Welcome to the world of opinion, it's a colourful place where dyslexic piss boilers can have opinion without credence.

His posts are almost illegible. Agreed. They transpire as lazy. However, adsgreen understood them enough to weigh in with a response, now didn't he?

No. Mr. Green replied to Mak… now didn’t he?

He asked an innocent question about a flywheel. You ripped him a new one because his verbalised post was not pigeon holed in your 'acceptably composed post for a dyslexic'. Not that you knew that when he first posted but it transpired quickly to be the case.

He asked a question, let’s not get dramatic about innocence. I corrected his lazy <beep> spelling and I later criticised further laziness to deploy one of the many free spell checker. Did I miss something?

Bob Dylan gets denied to restaurants and night clubs? Really? You been subscribing to PopBitch again?

Yes, I think so, does that make it untrue? Since you’ve got PopBitch in your favourites, can you please post the link up?

Why did I post my response? Because clearly the guy can't verbalise any response spell checked or not that wouldn't add fuel to your fire. That's one sided and it needed some balance, in my opinion. Got a problem with that?

Not at all, my hero. x

Finally, do I have a problem with your opinion? Not at all it's a freeworld. I could distill your response down to the fact you have a problem with my response to your initial response, based purely on the fact that you employ a spell check (great for you) and Jamie Stanton hasn't.

Great day in the world of opinion, ain’t it?

Don't let that piss boil over. It'll only make a mess.

I’m only pissing in your ball-park, I don’t sweat the small stuff.

[Spectre]

The issue is that the flywheel is both an energy store and a damper.
The crank in our cars sees 4 pulses of acceleration every rotation.
You need the stored energy to keep the crank turning in between cylinder pulses otherwise the crank would slow down dramatically before the next combustion event due to other cylinders being compressed.
The damper aspect is that the flywheel also reduces the "peaks" of the acceleration events. So instead of the crank accelerating quickly the flywheel also smooth's things out.
Dual mass flywheel is a way of dealing with high compression engines - high compression engines like ours and diesels have proportionately larger acceleration (and deceleration) events. This would normally need a larger flywheel to cope but then this transmits a lot to the geartrain. So if the fly wheel is effectively split in two with one side connected to the crankshaft then other to the gearbox and linked with a spring damper. With the car in neutral the engine "sees" the whole flywheel mass so has a nice low steady idle. When in gear the engine "sees" only the inner mass and the transmission is damped with the outer mass meaning the engine is reasonably free to pick up speed and the transmission is damped to make it quiet.

Overall the DMF is a really elegant solution to the problem however as is pretty well documented, elegant but fragile.

A lighter single mass flywheel will obviously reduce the rotating mass of the system which has benefits. You don't want to go too light though as lighter wheels will accelerate faster but in a similar vein will also decelerate faster before the next "event".
But you do loose the gearbox damping which is why some get a degree of gearbox "chatter". You'll also need to adjust (probably by only a small amount) launch rpm as the engine will be more prone to stalling.

As for the crank? well you are putting more stress on the crank as the acceleration events will be less damped. As to say if will cause a failure? Hard to say - the crank is strong in our cars as are the bearings given the high rpm and with 8 cylinders the time between combustions is also lower than say a v6 or inline 4. I think there are now plenty of people using them for a long time without issue so I would say that it should be ok.

Great answer!

[neilparf]

How big is your chip, old chap?

Hmmm, how long you got, young bean?

An eternity for you. If the therapist is away, my shoulder is your shoulder. Go on, spill. PM if it's too painful.

Young bean? Flattery will not get you closer to a candle lit dinner for two.

You missed my point about understanding the aftermath of employing a spell check. For the sake of brevity, here it is again: ...It's not about being be able to spell it's about not having the ability to see chracters or words that make sense or are in the correct order. If he had managed to spell check, correct accordingly and post he simply wouldn't know that it was correct, or not. That's dyslexia for you. Capeesh now? Either way...

Oh I got your point but I’ve seen way worse than Jamie turn around their writing around just by using a spell checker and start to use comparison techniques of historical writing. I'd surmise that if monetary incentive were involved, he'd be smashing it out of the park (see what I did there?)

I did see your adept word smithery - a stellar bit of paraphrasing and playing on my words. I notice s***e like that. Qualifying brackets not necessary. You are clearly wasted at the local radio station writing jingles ten to the penny.

You have a lot to offer. You should take Jamie under your wing - a bit like an Obi-Wan and Skywalker kinda set-up. Oh, hold on a minute, that didn't end well for either of them. Strike that notion.

Just because it's lazy to not to employ a spell doesn't mean he's also a '<beep>'. Furthermore, having dyslexia yourself doesn't add any credence to your point.

Welcome to the world of opinion, it's a colourful place where dyslexic piss boilers can have opinion without credence.

It is indeed. Made all the better when Crayola paint it for you.

His posts are almost illegible. Agreed. They transpire as lazy. However, adsgreen understood them enough to weigh in with a response, now didn't he?

No. Mr. Green replied to Mak… now didn’t he?

Yes and no. Mak's response was to Jamie's and then Mr. Green posted in response to that. Without the former the later would have been ultimately directly, If we really want to scrutinise accuracy.

He asked an innocent question about a flywheel. You ripped him a new one because his verbalised post was not pigeon holed in your 'acceptably composed post for a dyslexic'. Not that you knew that when he first posted but it transpired quickly to be the case.

He asked a question, let’s not get dramatic about innocence. I corrected his lazy <beep> spelling and I later criticised further laziness to deploy one of the many free spell checker. Did I miss something?

No, not at all. You have it covered in your own way. My hero x.

Bob Dylan gets denied to restaurants and night clubs? Really? You been subscribing to PopBitch again?

Yes, I think so, does that make it untrue? Since you’ve got PopBitch in your favourites, can you please post the link up?

Assumptions will get you nowhere on my favourites menu bar. Well, actually they have. Just because I cite a website doesn't necessarily mean I have it in my favourites. One could draw comparison to an individual posting a poorly composed post and assume he's a lazy <beep>, but not dyslexic.

Just for you: http://popbitch.com/home/ (straight from Google, not my favourites).

Why did I post my response? Because clearly the guy can't verbalise any response spell checked or not that wouldn't add fuel to your fire. That's one sided and it needed some balance, in my opinion. Got a problem with that?

Not at all, my hero. x

Good. There's still a scintilla of love in you, then.

Finally, do I have a problem with your opinion? Not at all it's a freeworld. I could distill your response down to the fact you have a problem with my response to your initial response, based purely on the fact that you employ a spell check (great for you) and Jamie Stanton hasn't.

Great day in the world of opinion, ain’t it?

Oh indeed it is. Made a fragment better for you to take your time over this s***e.

Don't let that piss boil over. It'll only make a mess.

I’m only pissing in your ball-park, I don’t sweat the small stuff.

A wonderful mantra to live by. It's served you well.

[Marten]

I've had the Loba setup on my car for about 25000-30000 km's. It does chatter from time to time (low rpms in too high gear), but otherwise I like it. Hasn't given me any trouble so far.

[Tile Diver]

What was the original question!!!

[Robnic]

Flywheels? Lol

I've got Loba fw cars new to me but it's been in around 20k chatters like hell through g'box which doesn't sound healthy but only if as already said too low revs and too high a gear if you avoid doing that there are no issues.

[Jamiestanton]

Cool I am getting the same with myn but good to know that others have had no probs nice one boys

[jaysrs4]

Just had a lightened fly wheel fitted and it seams great
But a cupple have said watch the crank don't go !????
But they then go on about there mate done it to his vector and it blew crank out
I am sure if this happened then mrc would not sell them any one got alloy fly wheel and ever had any probs with this ?

To a degree I have to side with Bam. I see exactly where he's coming from. I recall an old post from Jamie about his newly purchased RS4 smoking, it read a tad 'junior'.

Posting comments like - 'watch the crank don't go' and 'Me mate with a Vector (I take it that's not of the 'twin turbo' variety but the 'prostitute, murdering kind' that John Cleland failed miserably in BTCC because it was only any good for murdering prostitutes in. You sound like the kind of guy the R32OC is now full of, absolute retards who've bought a shitter of an R32 that used to own a Saxo (in not saying this is you), but your immature reaction to Bam's flaming did expose you slightly.

Bam is harsh but 'straight talking', if you've met him in person, you'll know he's got one of the driest, funniest senses of humours you'll ever experience, and I've only spent a day with the chap - he'll tear many people down - he's part of the furniture here. However, that's not to say he's always right (he's not a true Brit for a start, so essentially he's a cripple ) this is why I sympathise with him!!!

A forum is where you can EASILY be judged by what you type, why on earth some people don't think before they commit I don't know, I for one don't want to be remembered for posting utter shat, because if you meet me, I like to think I don't talk utter shat.

From your posts Jamie, you 'sound' like a bit of a stereotypical 'ricer', I'm not saying you are (because I've never met you), but your posts create that impression, maybe if I ever met you the conversation 'wouldn't' go - 'Reet mate, how much you boot it on way over, I raced a Ferrari and burnt it off with me new lightweight flywheel cos me RS4 now revs to 10,000 grand'. Oh and your socks wouldn't be tucked in to your Kappa trakki bottoms!!! - Just saying.