Richard Seaton wrote:
>The before weight was 22 lbs w/ ring gear and 14lbs after.
Richard, if this is cast-iron, I would not use this flywheel at all. I
consider that too much material has been removed. I *strongly*
encourage you to wrap several layers (up to 1" thick) of kevlar around
the bell housing to act as a scatter shield if you wish to use this wheel.
I would contend that this is highly dangerous, especially in a high
revving motor.
Perhaps I am wrong here, but Richard states that his early stock
flywheel weighed 22 lbs (w/ring gear). This is 7 lbs lighter than
late-model cast-iron flywheels. Is this correct? Or does Richard
have a wheel that had been prevously lightened, or maybe even
an aftermarket flywheel? Conventional wisdom states that the
lightest the cast-iron wheels can be cut down to is 22 lbs.
Revington (and Cambridge and Moss UK) offer steel flywheels.
Steel flywheels are expensive, simply because there is a lot of material
to cut with a lathe. The starter-teeth are cut directly into the wheel.
Aluminum flywheels are considerably cheaper because aluminum is
softer and easier to mill. Costs are kept even lower because the ring
gear is pegged to the aluminum disk (aluminum teeth would never
last). They can only be refaced a small number of times before
becoming an expensive lawn ornament. And finally, yes, they do walk
on the crank nose bolts, regardless of how many pegs you use. I don't
recall Kastner calling aluminum wheels "junk", but his statements made
about them were equally evocative.
Shane Ingate, researching front disk rotor alternatives, in Maryland
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
|