Installed Lite Flywheel!
05-13-2004, 07:46 PM
#126
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca
Posts: 1,473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is my write up as promised about the flywheel/clutch.
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...threadid=28384
Thankx!
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...threadid=28384
Thankx!
05-13-2004, 08:19 PM
#127
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A new clutch isn't necessary. It's just that while you're in there, you might as well put in a new high perf clutch in if that's something you wanted to do.
Personally, I'm cheap. I'm getting only the MS flywheel. No clutch.
I found an intereting take on flywheels:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7177/flywheel.html
It agrees with my line of thinking: You will notice the greatest acceleration in lower gears, thus improving 0-60 times.
First, lets review how gears work:
The reason we have gears (simple machines) is to reduce the total weight the engine "sees". Everybody knows that if we tried to start the vehicle from a dead start in 6th gear, you would stall immediately. Why? Because in 6th gear you are exposing the entire weight of the vehicle to the engine. That is, you are exposing all 2000+ raw weight along with the weight of spinning engine components - ie the flywheel. By using gears (simple machines) we effectively reduce the entire weight the engine sees. The engine thus has to do less work. As you up shift, you are adding in more weight the engine sees. But the engine can handle this weight since it has built up a lot of momentum by this time. By 6th gear you are exposing the full weight of the vehicle that the engine "sees". Mountain bikes use the same physics concepts here.
Now, how do gears have to do with flywheels?
A lot. Split up the weight into two things:
1. literal weight of the car minus spinning engine parts
2. weight of the flywheel/other spinning engine parts
Sure, the MS flywheel only weighs 10 lbs lighter than stock. So how can this possibly make any difference? Well when you take something that weighs 10 lbs and spin it upwards of 9000 RPMs, that 10 lbs suddenly saves the engine from a LOT of work. Again the engine sees the weight of the vehicle and the weight of the flywheel. The work required on the engine is significantly less for a lightened flywheel in LOWER gears and about the same in HIGHER gears.
For example, hypothetically, say the weight the engine "sees" in 1st gear is as follows:
150 vehicle weight, and 25 lbs flywheel weight
(remember the flywheel comes before the gearbox, so it doesn't get an effective weight reduction like the rest of the vehicle does)
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 25 flywheel
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 25 flywheel
...
6th gear:
2000 vehicle, 25 flywheel
So now, let's replace the 25lb flywheel with a lightened flywheel
1st gear:
150 vehicle , 10 flywheel <= By weight alone, this is already
9% less weight the engine "sees"
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 10 flwheel <= Weight engine "sees" drops to
4%
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Down to 2% advantage
...
2000 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Virtually the same as stock flywheel.
In my above example, I'm using purely weight alone. We are not considering that most of the lightened flywheel weight is centered where as it is spread out more evenly on a stock flywheel. Try taking a sledgehammer using one arm, hold the bottom of the handle and spin it in a verticle circle perpendicular to the ground. Kind of hard huh? Now, flip the slege hammer around so that you are holding the sledge (the opposite end) and rotate this in a circle. Much easier huh? Same concept for an engine spinning a flywheel with weight towards center rather than towards outside.
Personally, I'm cheap. I'm getting only the MS flywheel. No clutch.
I found an intereting take on flywheels:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7177/flywheel.html
It agrees with my line of thinking: You will notice the greatest acceleration in lower gears, thus improving 0-60 times.
First, lets review how gears work:
The reason we have gears (simple machines) is to reduce the total weight the engine "sees". Everybody knows that if we tried to start the vehicle from a dead start in 6th gear, you would stall immediately. Why? Because in 6th gear you are exposing the entire weight of the vehicle to the engine. That is, you are exposing all 2000+ raw weight along with the weight of spinning engine components - ie the flywheel. By using gears (simple machines) we effectively reduce the entire weight the engine sees. The engine thus has to do less work. As you up shift, you are adding in more weight the engine sees. But the engine can handle this weight since it has built up a lot of momentum by this time. By 6th gear you are exposing the full weight of the vehicle that the engine "sees". Mountain bikes use the same physics concepts here.
Now, how do gears have to do with flywheels?
A lot. Split up the weight into two things:
1. literal weight of the car minus spinning engine parts
2. weight of the flywheel/other spinning engine parts
Sure, the MS flywheel only weighs 10 lbs lighter than stock. So how can this possibly make any difference? Well when you take something that weighs 10 lbs and spin it upwards of 9000 RPMs, that 10 lbs suddenly saves the engine from a LOT of work. Again the engine sees the weight of the vehicle and the weight of the flywheel. The work required on the engine is significantly less for a lightened flywheel in LOWER gears and about the same in HIGHER gears.
For example, hypothetically, say the weight the engine "sees" in 1st gear is as follows:
150 vehicle weight, and 25 lbs flywheel weight
(remember the flywheel comes before the gearbox, so it doesn't get an effective weight reduction like the rest of the vehicle does)
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 25 flywheel
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 25 flywheel
...
6th gear:
2000 vehicle, 25 flywheel
So now, let's replace the 25lb flywheel with a lightened flywheel
1st gear:
150 vehicle , 10 flywheel <= By weight alone, this is already
9% less weight the engine "sees"
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 10 flwheel <= Weight engine "sees" drops to
4%
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Down to 2% advantage
...
2000 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Virtually the same as stock flywheel.
In my above example, I'm using purely weight alone. We are not considering that most of the lightened flywheel weight is centered where as it is spread out more evenly on a stock flywheel. Try taking a sledgehammer using one arm, hold the bottom of the handle and spin it in a verticle circle perpendicular to the ground. Kind of hard huh? Now, flip the slege hammer around so that you are holding the sledge (the opposite end) and rotate this in a circle. Much easier huh? Same concept for an engine spinning a flywheel with weight towards center rather than towards outside.
05-16-2004, 04:56 AM
#129
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MrWigggles
86Rx7,
The fast 5.9 second 0-60 times that Road and Track and Car and Driver got where from reving it up to around 8000 RPM. You wouldn't be able to go much higher than that with a light flywheel to compensate. You will hit the rev limiter instead.
My point to breezy who claimed that the RX-8 can do a 5.8 (not sure who got a number that low on a production RX-8) was that a launch like that is a VERY hard launch. You are not going to get much improvements in the 0-60 tests because a lighter flywheel won't give you quite as much bump at the beginning.
Doing a easy street start 5-60 on my RX-8 I get about .4 gs of acceleration in the mid-upper rpm band. If you dump the clutch just right with a hard start you can use all of the stock flywheel to get you closer to the .6 or so g level before the wheels will break free. Now once you have depleted the stored energy, the heavier flywheel will make the car slower to accelerate because more energy is being stored in the flywheel. However, the same goes for the 1-2nd shifts, you will be getting some that energy back (and you will be losing the rest as heat).
0-30 times will probably be faster with a heavier flywheel, 0-60 times will be about the same, and every other imaginable performance test with the light flywheel should be better.
I don't mean to imply that in anyway that a lighter flywheel will make the RX-8 a slower car just that high reving drag racing 0-60 tests will be a about a wash either way. Using 8000 RPM drop, the heavier flywheel is going to have more energy at the start (which will be tricky to put down effectively) while a lighter flywheel is going to quicker in general.
No one drives there cars that hard on a regular basis, so for just about everyone a lighter flywheel be faster in every test - like you mention. But the magazines got their sub-6 second 0-60 numbers by dropping at 8000 RPM.
-Mr. Wigggles
86Rx7,
The fast 5.9 second 0-60 times that Road and Track and Car and Driver got where from reving it up to around 8000 RPM. You wouldn't be able to go much higher than that with a light flywheel to compensate. You will hit the rev limiter instead.
My point to breezy who claimed that the RX-8 can do a 5.8 (not sure who got a number that low on a production RX-8) was that a launch like that is a VERY hard launch. You are not going to get much improvements in the 0-60 tests because a lighter flywheel won't give you quite as much bump at the beginning.
Doing a easy street start 5-60 on my RX-8 I get about .4 gs of acceleration in the mid-upper rpm band. If you dump the clutch just right with a hard start you can use all of the stock flywheel to get you closer to the .6 or so g level before the wheels will break free. Now once you have depleted the stored energy, the heavier flywheel will make the car slower to accelerate because more energy is being stored in the flywheel. However, the same goes for the 1-2nd shifts, you will be getting some that energy back (and you will be losing the rest as heat).
0-30 times will probably be faster with a heavier flywheel, 0-60 times will be about the same, and every other imaginable performance test with the light flywheel should be better.
I don't mean to imply that in anyway that a lighter flywheel will make the RX-8 a slower car just that high reving drag racing 0-60 tests will be a about a wash either way. Using 8000 RPM drop, the heavier flywheel is going to have more energy at the start (which will be tricky to put down effectively) while a lighter flywheel is going to quicker in general.
No one drives there cars that hard on a regular basis, so for just about everyone a lighter flywheel be faster in every test - like you mention. But the magazines got their sub-6 second 0-60 numbers by dropping at 8000 RPM.
-Mr. Wigggles
05-16-2004, 06:04 AM
#130
Registered User
Originally posted by 86rx7
That Doesnt quite make sense, you cant drop the clutch, lightflywheel or not at 8k rpm and not just do a big fat burn out. You either have to slip it at 8k, or drop it at like 5k to get a good launch (never launched an 8, but my rex with 100 less HP and a light flywheel lights them up at anything over about 5.5k drop) If they are dropping the clutch, they just need to drop it a 1k or so higher then normal, if they were slipping it at 8k, they will get the same results because there is an excess of power at 8k (as demonstrated by the ability to burn out) thus they just have to give a little more gas and drop it a little faster to get the same acelleration with the lighter flywheel. If Light flywheels yeilded slower drag racing times, drag racing cars wouldnt use them,...
That Doesnt quite make sense, you cant drop the clutch, lightflywheel or not at 8k rpm and not just do a big fat burn out. You either have to slip it at 8k, or drop it at like 5k to get a good launch (never launched an 8, but my rex with 100 less HP and a light flywheel lights them up at anything over about 5.5k drop) If they are dropping the clutch, they just need to drop it a 1k or so higher then normal, if they were slipping it at 8k, they will get the same results because there is an excess of power at 8k (as demonstrated by the ability to burn out) thus they just have to give a little more gas and drop it a little faster to get the same acelleration with the lighter flywheel. If Light flywheels yeilded slower drag racing times, drag racing cars wouldnt use them,...
With a tire-smoking launch (best times were achieved dropping the clutch at about 7500 rpm), the RX-8 in our testing sees 60 mph in 5.9 seconds and charges through the quarter in 14.5 sec.
With the help of an 8000-rpm clutch drop and the engine buzzing like a flock of angry hornets, the RX-8 scooted to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds and through the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds at 96 mph.
BTW, I believe I said ALL other performance test from 0-60 and beyond would benefit from a lighter flywheel (i.e. drag racing). 0-60 being about the brake even point for our particular car.
Once again, all of what I've said only applies (and will repeat myself again if I need to) if you do a high RPM clutch drop. All other performance tests have a light flywheel as an advantage.
I do have one on order.
-Mr. Wigggles
Last edited by MrWigggles; 05-16-2004 at 06:16 AM.
05-16-2004, 06:19 AM
#131
Registered User
Originally posted by RotorMotor04
good find!!! maybe this will change the mind of all the light flywheel naysayers?
good find!!! maybe this will change the mind of all the light flywheel naysayers?
I can guess. I bet my guessing skills are better than your reading.
If you weren't refering to me, I appologize; please mention who. If you were refering to me, please re-read.
-Mr. Wigggles
Last edited by MrWigggles; 05-16-2004 at 06:35 AM.
05-16-2004, 08:32 AM
#132
Wut da F Y'all lookin' @!
Originally posted by breezy_rx8
A new clutch isn't necessary. It's just that while you're in there, you might as well put in a new high perf clutch in if that's something you wanted to do.
Personally, I'm cheap. I'm getting only the MS flywheel. No clutch.
I found an intereting take on flywheels:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7177/flywheel.html
It agrees with my line of thinking: You will notice the greatest acceleration in lower gears, thus improving 0-60 times.
First, lets review how gears work:
The reason we have gears (simple machines) is to reduce the total weight the engine "sees". Everybody knows that if we tried to start the vehicle from a dead start in 6th gear, you would stall immediately. Why? Because in 6th gear you are exposing the entire weight of the vehicle to the engine. That is, you are exposing all 2000+ raw weight along with the weight of spinning engine components - ie the flywheel. By using gears (simple machines) we effectively reduce the entire weight the engine sees. The engine thus has to do less work. As you up shift, you are adding in more weight the engine sees. But the engine can handle this weight since it has built up a lot of momentum by this time. By 6th gear you are exposing the full weight of the vehicle that the engine "sees". Mountain bikes use the same physics concepts here.
Now, how do gears have to do with flywheels?
A lot. Split up the weight into two things:
1. literal weight of the car minus spinning engine parts
2. weight of the flywheel/other spinning engine parts
Sure, the MS flywheel only weighs 10 lbs lighter than stock. So how can this possibly make any difference? Well when you take something that weighs 10 lbs and spin it upwards of 9000 RPMs, that 10 lbs suddenly saves the engine from a LOT of work. Again the engine sees the weight of the vehicle and the weight of the flywheel. The work required on the engine is significantly less for a lightened flywheel in LOWER gears and about the same in HIGHER gears.
For example, hypothetically, say the weight the engine "sees" in 1st gear is as follows:
150 vehicle weight, and 25 lbs flywheel weight
(remember the flywheel comes before the gearbox, so it doesn't get an effective weight reduction like the rest of the vehicle does)
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 25 flywheel
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 25 flywheel
...
6th gear:
2000 vehicle, 25 flywheel
So now, let's replace the 25lb flywheel with a lightened flywheel
1st gear:
150 vehicle , 10 flywheel <= By weight alone, this is already
9% less weight the engine "sees"
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 10 flwheel <= Weight engine "sees" drops to
4%
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Down to 2% advantage
...
2000 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Virtually the same as stock flywheel.
In my above example, I'm using purely weight alone. We are not considering that most of the lightened flywheel weight is centered where as it is spread out more evenly on a stock flywheel. Try taking a sledgehammer using one arm, hold the bottom of the handle and spin it in a verticle circle perpendicular to the ground. Kind of hard huh? Now, flip the slege hammer around so that you are holding the sledge (the opposite end) and rotate this in a circle. Much easier huh? Same concept for an engine spinning a flywheel with weight towards center rather than towards outside.
A new clutch isn't necessary. It's just that while you're in there, you might as well put in a new high perf clutch in if that's something you wanted to do.
Personally, I'm cheap. I'm getting only the MS flywheel. No clutch.
I found an intereting take on flywheels:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7177/flywheel.html
It agrees with my line of thinking: You will notice the greatest acceleration in lower gears, thus improving 0-60 times.
First, lets review how gears work:
The reason we have gears (simple machines) is to reduce the total weight the engine "sees". Everybody knows that if we tried to start the vehicle from a dead start in 6th gear, you would stall immediately. Why? Because in 6th gear you are exposing the entire weight of the vehicle to the engine. That is, you are exposing all 2000+ raw weight along with the weight of spinning engine components - ie the flywheel. By using gears (simple machines) we effectively reduce the entire weight the engine sees. The engine thus has to do less work. As you up shift, you are adding in more weight the engine sees. But the engine can handle this weight since it has built up a lot of momentum by this time. By 6th gear you are exposing the full weight of the vehicle that the engine "sees". Mountain bikes use the same physics concepts here.
Now, how do gears have to do with flywheels?
A lot. Split up the weight into two things:
1. literal weight of the car minus spinning engine parts
2. weight of the flywheel/other spinning engine parts
Sure, the MS flywheel only weighs 10 lbs lighter than stock. So how can this possibly make any difference? Well when you take something that weighs 10 lbs and spin it upwards of 9000 RPMs, that 10 lbs suddenly saves the engine from a LOT of work. Again the engine sees the weight of the vehicle and the weight of the flywheel. The work required on the engine is significantly less for a lightened flywheel in LOWER gears and about the same in HIGHER gears.
For example, hypothetically, say the weight the engine "sees" in 1st gear is as follows:
150 vehicle weight, and 25 lbs flywheel weight
(remember the flywheel comes before the gearbox, so it doesn't get an effective weight reduction like the rest of the vehicle does)
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 25 flywheel
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 25 flywheel
...
6th gear:
2000 vehicle, 25 flywheel
So now, let's replace the 25lb flywheel with a lightened flywheel
1st gear:
150 vehicle , 10 flywheel <= By weight alone, this is already
9% less weight the engine "sees"
2nd gear:
400 vehicle, 10 flwheel <= Weight engine "sees" drops to
4%
3rd gear:
800 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Down to 2% advantage
...
2000 vehicle, 10 flywheel <= Virtually the same as stock flywheel.
In my above example, I'm using purely weight alone. We are not considering that most of the lightened flywheel weight is centered where as it is spread out more evenly on a stock flywheel. Try taking a sledgehammer using one arm, hold the bottom of the handle and spin it in a verticle circle perpendicular to the ground. Kind of hard huh? Now, flip the slege hammer around so that you are holding the sledge (the opposite end) and rotate this in a circle. Much easier huh? Same concept for an engine spinning a flywheel with weight towards center rather than towards outside.
Now correct me if I am not understanding this correctly! There is a portion in that link in which he says that some flywheel swaps can result in the car feeling 20% lighter in 1st gear. I don't mean to imply that this is the case with the MS Flywheel but if that were then best case scenario would be the 8 would feel about 600lbs lighter during 1st gear acceleration. I think I might be joining the list of people who want to do the flywheel swap. Thanks Breezy! Even if I don't do the swap I still learned something.
05-16-2004, 11:02 AM
#134
This isn't a MPG mod, although it would yield a minor difference theoretically.
Anyway, to keep my warranty I’d prefer to go with MazdaSpeed.
Now far as drivability can someone do a quick test?
Can your car still engage first gear without any gas, just by lightly taking your foot off the clutch?
Anyway, to keep my warranty I’d prefer to go with MazdaSpeed.
Now far as drivability can someone do a quick test?
Can your car still engage first gear without any gas, just by lightly taking your foot off the clutch?
05-16-2004, 11:10 AM
#135
Registered User
Originally posted by JasonHamilton
Have you guys noticed an increase in gas mileage?
Have you guys noticed an increase in gas mileage?
It definitely won't hurt MPG unless you get a little too happy driving your new toy.
-Mr. Wigggles
Last edited by MrWigggles; 05-16-2004 at 02:25 PM.
05-16-2004, 02:31 PM
#137
Registered User
rxeightr,
I got the Mazdaspeed version for waranty reasons mainly. I have already had my car in the shop for transmission work. If it has to go in again, I don't want them blaming it on the clutch.
Also Rosenthal Mazda has the Mazdaspeed on backorder for $522 with free shipping. The ACT pro-lite would be my next choice and it appears to be a little over $400 with shipping.
So for a little over $100 more, might as well stick with the official stuff and avoid any warranty complications.
For similar reasons, I plan to keep my clutch the way it is also. When it actually wears out in 60K miles+, I will consider a new one.
-Mr. Wigggles
I got the Mazdaspeed version for waranty reasons mainly. I have already had my car in the shop for transmission work. If it has to go in again, I don't want them blaming it on the clutch.
Also Rosenthal Mazda has the Mazdaspeed on backorder for $522 with free shipping. The ACT pro-lite would be my next choice and it appears to be a little over $400 with shipping.
So for a little over $100 more, might as well stick with the official stuff and avoid any warranty complications.
For similar reasons, I plan to keep my clutch the way it is also. When it actually wears out in 60K miles+, I will consider a new one.
-Mr. Wigggles
05-16-2004, 03:25 PM
#138
M0D Squad -charter member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like the exact way I would go.
Will you have the dealer install, or your own install?
I would like to do my own install if it does not give the Mazda dealer any reason to want to void the warranty.
Will you have the dealer install, or your own install?
I would like to do my own install if it does not give the Mazda dealer any reason to want to void the warranty.
05-16-2004, 03:54 PM
#139
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I stand corrected. I still think they had to have featherd the clutch a little or they would have gone no where fast... And i still do think that 0-60 will improve with a lighter flywheel.
05-16-2004, 04:02 PM
#140
Registered User
rxeightr,
Technically the dealer has to prove that an upgrade you did was the cause of a malfunction before they can deny you a warranty claim.
In practice you will probably find dealers who are real ****** and some that are frankly too lenient.
Using Mazdaspeed parts that are installed by Mazdaspeed dealers is a "safe harbor", but shouldn't be a necessity to keeping your warranty.
For the record, my dealer told me that the job will take 2.5 hours our of their labor book, but they charge 4 hours for non-warranty work (they have to get their money somewhere). I think the labor rate is about $70 an hour. So I am looking at $280 for labor and $522 exactly for parts. That makes it an $800 upgrade, which I think is pretty good bang for the buck.
-Mr. Wigggles
Technically the dealer has to prove that an upgrade you did was the cause of a malfunction before they can deny you a warranty claim.
In practice you will probably find dealers who are real ****** and some that are frankly too lenient.
Using Mazdaspeed parts that are installed by Mazdaspeed dealers is a "safe harbor", but shouldn't be a necessity to keeping your warranty.
For the record, my dealer told me that the job will take 2.5 hours our of their labor book, but they charge 4 hours for non-warranty work (they have to get their money somewhere). I think the labor rate is about $70 an hour. So I am looking at $280 for labor and $522 exactly for parts. That makes it an $800 upgrade, which I think is pretty good bang for the buck.
-Mr. Wigggles
05-16-2004, 04:07 PM
#141
Registered User
Originally posted by 86rx7
I stand corrected. I still think they had to have featherd the clutch a little or they would have gone no where fast... And i still do think that 0-60 will improve with a lighter flywheel.
I stand corrected. I still think they had to have featherd the clutch a little or they would have gone no where fast... And i still do think that 0-60 will improve with a lighter flywheel.
The way normal people drive their cars the 0-60 should definitely be faster with a lighter flywheel.
-Mr. Wigggles
05-16-2004, 04:29 PM
#142
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all-
I think my dealer's trying to rip me off on the labor for the MS flywheel. It was supposed to be installed already but is on back order as Mr. Wiggles says. They're charging me $496 for the flywheel and $560 labor. I told them that RX-8 owners are doing the job in 1.5-2.5 hours themselves and that 5 hours labor seems a bit excessive. Their reply:
IT WILL TAKE LONGER THAN 2 HOURS FOR SURE! TRANSMISSION HAS TO BE DROPPED - TAKES ABOUT 5 HRS. APPROX.
I am completely ignorant into what goes into "dropping a transmission" but I can't imagine it is something that is super time consuming. The service dude told me he would try to cut me a break on the labor. If there's any break to be cut in the first place tells me they're ripping me off.
Let me ask everyone who has had dealer install the MS flywheel, what did they charge labor wise? And how much time did they say it took??
Thanks
I think my dealer's trying to rip me off on the labor for the MS flywheel. It was supposed to be installed already but is on back order as Mr. Wiggles says. They're charging me $496 for the flywheel and $560 labor. I told them that RX-8 owners are doing the job in 1.5-2.5 hours themselves and that 5 hours labor seems a bit excessive. Their reply:
IT WILL TAKE LONGER THAN 2 HOURS FOR SURE! TRANSMISSION HAS TO BE DROPPED - TAKES ABOUT 5 HRS. APPROX.
I am completely ignorant into what goes into "dropping a transmission" but I can't imagine it is something that is super time consuming. The service dude told me he would try to cut me a break on the labor. If there's any break to be cut in the first place tells me they're ripping me off.
Let me ask everyone who has had dealer install the MS flywheel, what did they charge labor wise? And how much time did they say it took??
Thanks
05-16-2004, 06:49 PM
#143
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca
Posts: 1,473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should be lucky that they only want that much. When I first contacted mazda about it they told me 800 dollars labor. I ended up going with a local tuning shop.. San Dimas Auto Racing.. and they did it in 5 1/2 hours at 375. They replaced both flywheel and clutch in that time.
05-19-2004, 11:22 PM
#145
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: lancaster, ca
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by rotarygod
The problem is with the wrong weight counterweight being used. This is very noticable the second you start the car. The proper counterwieght will work just fine.
The problem is with the wrong weight counterweight being used. This is very noticable the second you start the car. The proper counterwieght will work just fine.
If you use the stock automatic rear counterweight on your manual shift car, you have to take the motor apart and change to the automatic front counterweight. No thanks! The difference is not huge, but certainly enough for potential problems. In a week or so we will offer a counterweight custom balanced to accommodate the manual shift front counterweight (and our flywheels of course). Initially I assumed that the balance was the same from AT to Manual but since we had the tools to test it, I decided to confirm the balance. That's how we discovered the problem. It helps to do the homework.
05-20-2004, 07:36 AM
#146
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: VA
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I have had my flywheel on for months with no problems. I think your blowing smoke just to sell your product. IMO of course. Mazda is the company that made the car and Mazdaspeed is a sister company. Why would they give you an auto counter balance if it was incorrect. Would it not screw up there warranty they give? C'mon it is not as complex as everyone makes it out to be. Nothing is perfect anyways.
05-20-2004, 11:21 AM
#147
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listen to ACTman. This would not be the first time Mazda has, for reasons unknown, balanced the auto vs manual engines differently. This was the case with the 81-82 12A engines. Putting a lightweight flywheel (with auto trans rear counterweight) on a manual trans engine resulted in an undesirable vibration. Maybe some people would not notice - doesn't mean it's not there. The correct installation for this engine was to remove the front cover, take lots of stuff apart, and change the front counterweight to the auto version).
To put in another way, how badly do you want to beat up your bearings?
Nice that someone's getting it right before releasing a product.
To put in another way, how badly do you want to beat up your bearings?
Nice that someone's getting it right before releasing a product.
05-20-2004, 11:54 AM
#148
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't buy it.
First there is little relation between the engine in the automatic and the engine in the 6spd manual. There is no reason for any automatic stuff to end up on the manual. It's not like the same engine and different trans... someone just made a mistake or something. AND... just because it happened on the 12A (that was how long ago now???) doesn't mean anything about the 13b-REW.
Second. The light flywheel that we're talking about here is the Mazdaspeed one... the one from Mazda that comes with its own counterweight. If it breaks... it sucks, but it's under warranty. So why should we care if Mazda didn't get it right? Just don't use any other flywheel besides MS. Problem solved... make it Mazda's problem.
Third. And why hasn't anyone else noticed this yet? Seems awefully convenient for ACTman who is just getting ready to release a competiting product. Got any evidence to back your claims?
First there is little relation between the engine in the automatic and the engine in the 6spd manual. There is no reason for any automatic stuff to end up on the manual. It's not like the same engine and different trans... someone just made a mistake or something. AND... just because it happened on the 12A (that was how long ago now???) doesn't mean anything about the 13b-REW.
Second. The light flywheel that we're talking about here is the Mazdaspeed one... the one from Mazda that comes with its own counterweight. If it breaks... it sucks, but it's under warranty. So why should we care if Mazda didn't get it right? Just don't use any other flywheel besides MS. Problem solved... make it Mazda's problem.
Third. And why hasn't anyone else noticed this yet? Seems awefully convenient for ACTman who is just getting ready to release a competiting product. Got any evidence to back your claims?
05-20-2004, 12:54 PM
#150
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: lancaster, ca
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Japan8
I don't buy it.
Third. And why hasn't anyone else noticed this yet? Seems awefully convenient for ACTman who is just getting ready to release a competiting product. Got any evidence to back your claims?
I don't buy it.
Third. And why hasn't anyone else noticed this yet? Seems awefully convenient for ACTman who is just getting ready to release a competiting product. Got any evidence to back your claims?