View Single Post
Old 11-02-2010, 09:46 AM   #13 (permalink)
ShadeTreeMech
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
So in summary.....

if you're planning on luggin in the lower rpms, heavier flywheels are better. If the engine needs to change speed frequently, lighter is better.

With a lightweight flywheel I would expect quicker engine speed changes with more vibration being transmitted to the drivetrain, especially at lower rpms.

With standard flywheel, I would expect a balance between light and heavy.

With a heavy flywheel I would expect a smoother idle and low range, a bit quicker starting, but delayed shifting with a manual and it feeling a bit less perky and a bit more powerful. The feel of torque would be higher, the quick accelerations slower.

A tractor would have a heavy flywheel because of the low rpms used, and the generally steady engine speed. Most tractors don't have a gas pedal but instead have a throttle selector similar to a lawnmower.

For city driving I would want a lightweight, for steady state driving or driving in hilly country or driving with a modified transmission with a higher top gear I would want a heavier flywheel.

So one is not better than the other, the standard flywheel is a compromise, and it all depends on your driving needs.

Or you can go electric and thumb your nose at the ICE.
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ShadeTreeMech For This Useful Post:
gone-ot (11-03-2010)