anyone?
Solid flywheel feedback
Have you had a solid flywheel fitted (or do you know anyone who has) and have there been any issues? (vibrations, driveshaft/gearbox failures)?
details would help too (cost, source, mileages, etc)
knowledge is power, as they say
details would help too (cost, source, mileages, etc)
knowledge is power, as they say
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
hi i had one fitted last april been good to me cost 586 thats for flywheel clutch and slave i cant tell the difference mate but some on here dont like them
Ford fit dmf's for a reason. The reason is its cheaper than strenghtening the crank etc. to deal with the torque of the larger diesel engines.
If you fit a solid flywheel you are directing all the stress to the crank etc - which is not up to the job.
So - drive sensibly with a solid or dmf and all will be fine. Drive like a nutter with the solid and you'll damage the engine. Drive like a nutter with the dmf and you'll damage the dmf.
If you fit a solid flywheel you are directing all the stress to the crank etc - which is not up to the job.
So - drive sensibly with a solid or dmf and all will be fine. Drive like a nutter with the solid and you'll damage the engine. Drive like a nutter with the dmf and you'll damage the dmf.
not much feedback though, id hoped for more from solid flywheel users
Yeah I was gonna put the same topic up for future reference. Seems ford cutting corners made a good car a right pain in the arse on your wallet
When my Tourneo 125ps Tdci needed a DMF the guy said that some were built with a SMF, but not mine and there wasnt a SMF for mine...
just had a smf fitted to my 115 6 speed. drives and feels just fine .am watching this topic with interest.
the torque going the smf is going to be the same as the torque going through a dmf isnt it?
please correct me if im wrong but i thought they were fitted to smooth out low speed vibration.
has anyone had a failure they can directly link to the smf conversion???
the torque going the smf is going to be the same as the torque going through a dmf isnt it?
please correct me if im wrong but i thought they were fitted to smooth out low speed vibration.
has anyone had a failure they can directly link to the smf conversion???
thats what the DMF does smooth out vibrations from the engine giving less stress on the crank and gearbox
the torq is the same its just the way Durvs run as that compress the fuel to fire this is turn gives alot of Lumpyness with in the engine and transmit thou the crank > gearbox
thats why all so you shouldnt drive in to high of a gear at very low speads ..
IE 30mph in 5th like a lot of drivers do
all ways try and keep your RPM in the 1700 above
i do remember some one on here had a snapped crank/input shaft due to SMF being fitted
the torq is the same its just the way Durvs run as that compress the fuel to fire this is turn gives alot of Lumpyness with in the engine and transmit thou the crank > gearbox
thats why all so you shouldnt drive in to high of a gear at very low speads ..
IE 30mph in 5th like a lot of drivers do
all ways try and keep your RPM in the 1700 above
i do remember some one on here had a snapped crank/input shaft due to SMF being fitted
I am interested with ford fitting SMF in some mondeo's, I wonder if they changed anything when fitting a SMF as standad!
I cannot accept the need to keep diesel engine revs high, they are TORQUE engines, designed for low rpm use, revving them should be a waste of time and fuel, i rarely exceed 2250 derby, so your giving me 1700-2250 as a useable band?markderby said:thats what the DMF does smooth out vibrations from the engine giving less stress on the crank and gearbox
the torq is the same its just the way Durvs run as that compress the fuel to fire this is turn gives alot of Lumpyness with in the engine and transmit thou the crank > gearbox
thats why all so you shouldnt drive in to high of a gear at very low speads ..
IE 30mph in 5th like a lot of drivers do
all ways try and keep your RPM in the 1700 above
i do remember some one on here had a snapped crank/input shaft due to SMF being fitted
mine pulls in 4th from 1300, and in 5th/6th from a little higher, god help us if the day comes we cant drive a diesel like a diesel!
Try stalling an old fashioned diesel, As long as your not standing on the brakes it will be fairly hard to stall.
Modern diesels are so much easier to stall, They sacrificed some low down torque to get more power & revs.
You wouldnt have bought a mondeo diesel that only revved to 1000rpm max & needed 12 gears to get upto motorway speeds.
We want them to perform like a petrol, I still have not got used to the lack of revs compared to my old petrol mondeo.
Modern diesels are so much easier to stall, They sacrificed some low down torque to get more power & revs.
You wouldnt have bought a mondeo diesel that only revved to 1000rpm max & needed 12 gears to get upto motorway speeds.
We want them to perform like a petrol, I still have not got used to the lack of revs compared to my old petrol mondeo.
DMF is primarily to attenuate torque "spikes" at low rpm, for example when stalling, switching off or suffering the dreaded low rpm idle, these spikes can apparently wreck the gearbox.
I try and drive above 2k rpm except when idling or decelerating, averaging 50ish mpg on mainly m/way and d/carriageway.
TDCi is a "torquey motor", only the torque is higher up the rev range than historical diesels.
I try and drive above 2k rpm except when idling or decelerating, averaging 50ish mpg on mainly m/way and d/carriageway.
TDCi is a "torquey motor", only the torque is higher up the rev range than historical diesels.
max torque on my tddi is reached at 2175 rpm. so basically anything after that the torque power decreases. thats a dyno result by the way.
as far as SMF vs DMF i would opt for dmf always! think of the damage you could be doing to your engine with a SMF. thinking about it ford are right to use dmf i will give an example of something here......
thinking about the old TD engines in the mk1 and mk2, there is a plastic tensioner on the cambelt and these usually fail before the belt does which is a pain yeah but if they had a metal one on there which would last longer and your belt snapped your gonna get a lot of damage. where as a plastic one breaking you can and ive seen it happen have no engine damage and just refit a new cambelt kit.
i think this is a similar argument with the SMF AND THE DMF i know its a lot of money to get a dmf and clutch done but an average of id say 120-130k life (some fail a lot sooner i know) that is about 10 years driving for some people. i knew when i bought my car at some point i would need the dmf done so i was financially prepared for it but im sensible sometimes lol
as far as SMF vs DMF i would opt for dmf always! think of the damage you could be doing to your engine with a SMF. thinking about it ford are right to use dmf i will give an example of something here......
thinking about the old TD engines in the mk1 and mk2, there is a plastic tensioner on the cambelt and these usually fail before the belt does which is a pain yeah but if they had a metal one on there which would last longer and your belt snapped your gonna get a lot of damage. where as a plastic one breaking you can and ive seen it happen have no engine damage and just refit a new cambelt kit.
i think this is a similar argument with the SMF AND THE DMF i know its a lot of money to get a dmf and clutch done but an average of id say 120-130k life (some fail a lot sooner i know) that is about 10 years driving for some people. i knew when i bought my car at some point i would need the dmf done so i was financially prepared for it but im sensible sometimes lol
Yeah - i think common sense should rule the day here - really 1500rpm ish the engine seems pretty happy in 1-4th on mine, maybe 1600ish in 5th.
My DMF was healthy when it was removed from the car last week, as was my clutch - it would have given 150K + service no worries looking at it. However, the wretched slave cylinder went, which to be fair i knew was faulty when i bought the car cheaply.
I dont suggest commonly poodling round at 1000rpm in 4th gear - i know sometimes in town traffic it happens that you end up going from 2nd to third for example or 1st to 2nd in traffic, but minimisig this will prevent DMF wear or box wear if you have a SMF.
of course there is some argument its no worse to change a box than it is a DMF cost wise.......
My DMF was healthy when it was removed from the car last week, as was my clutch - it would have given 150K + service no worries looking at it. However, the wretched slave cylinder went, which to be fair i knew was faulty when i bought the car cheaply.
I dont suggest commonly poodling round at 1000rpm in 4th gear - i know sometimes in town traffic it happens that you end up going from 2nd to third for example or 1st to 2nd in traffic, but minimisig this will prevent DMF wear or box wear if you have a SMF.
of course there is some argument its no worse to change a box than it is a DMF cost wise.......
Can the slave cylinder be changed without dismantling ie by making a hole through the clutch housing?
Larger petrol engines generally offer more flexibility than a diesel in terms of rev range, elderly Rover V8 will produce usable power from 1300ish to 6k, but then diesel gearing should compensate for this, so 2k rpm in 3rd and 4th for TDCi is at the start of a good spread of power for overtaking, with the additional benefit of being able to hang on to a gear if required. It needs a change in mindset to approach an overtake at 2k rpm in a TDCi instead of 4k in a 1.8 Mondeo
Larger petrol engines generally offer more flexibility than a diesel in terms of rev range, elderly Rover V8 will produce usable power from 1300ish to 6k, but then diesel gearing should compensate for this, so 2k rpm in 3rd and 4th for TDCi is at the start of a good spread of power for overtaking, with the additional benefit of being able to hang on to a gear if required. It needs a change in mindset to approach an overtake at 2k rpm in a TDCi instead of 4k in a 1.8 Mondeo
No, it fits over the gearbox input shaft so you would have to remove the gearbox to change it anyway, even with a large hole in the bellhousing.Micky said:Can the slave cylinder be changed without dismantling ie by making a hole through the clutch housing?
Thanks. If it's a common problem then perhaps a work around could be devised, but then I've not looked closely at the Mondeo clutch so no idea if it's feasible. Car is designed for 60k to 80k miles then throw it away, no clutch replacement or slave cylinder replacement anticipated by Frod in that time.
Re; RV8 flexibility, I did some testing this morning, purely in the interests of testing; RV8 will pull cleanly from a 600rpm with minimum clutch work up to 6k rpm (I got scared then) usable power from 1k rpm. Pulling away in 4th (out of 5) is not too difficult. However 20 mpg is not unusual, so swings and roundabouts. Roundabouts
Re; RV8 flexibility, I did some testing this morning, purely in the interests of testing; RV8 will pull cleanly from a 600rpm with minimum clutch work up to 6k rpm (I got scared then) usable power from 1k rpm. Pulling away in 4th (out of 5) is not too difficult. However 20 mpg is not unusual, so swings and roundabouts. Roundabouts
i dont like to keep revs below 2k for long.
the power and torque curve are balanced mostly between 2.5k and 3.5k.
driving below 1.8k will just use more fuel, wont be as smooth, and put more strain on DMf garunteed.
efficient driving is not high gear low revs wether its a diesel or not.
about the old type diesels being not as easy to stall, some of that is because modern diesels due to pilot injection and the use of DMf mean lower idling speed, so maybe slightly easier to stall at idle, but get a tdci around 1k and it should(if all is working ok) pull with plenty of torque much better than an old oilburner.
the power and torque curve are balanced mostly between 2.5k and 3.5k.
driving below 1.8k will just use more fuel, wont be as smooth, and put more strain on DMf garunteed.
efficient driving is not high gear low revs wether its a diesel or not.
about the old type diesels being not as easy to stall, some of that is because modern diesels due to pilot injection and the use of DMf mean lower idling speed, so maybe slightly easier to stall at idle, but get a tdci around 1k and it should(if all is working ok) pull with plenty of torque much better than an old oilburner.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Ford Automobiles Forum
A forum community dedicated to all Ford owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about news, reviews, performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
PURPLE_2L_LX
90 Replies
mondy zetecs
56 Replies
nicam49
22 Replies
Recommended Communities
