![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
rev3turbo wrote:tbh you wont need to alter your driving style at all.
Willenium wrote:We had one fitted with an uprated clutch last year when our old clutch seemingly exploded.Revs up a little more responsively.
I've been reading a couple of threads on here that got me thinking.Some of the members have discussed premature engine failure, apparently due to lightweight crank pulleys.
I started thinking about whether a lightened flywheel would have much the same effect
![]()
ashman wrote:I agree that losing the harmonic balancer in the crank pulley could be a bad thing, but I'm not sold on a light weight flywheel being an issue- as long as it is properly balanced of course.
synXero wrote:Surely the free reving idea is rubbish.![]()
I would've thought the primary resistance to the engines ability to rev is overwhelmingly the resistance of the tyres on the Tarmac.The speed of engine revs with the clutch disengaged doesn't interest me even slightly nor you I expect.
bobhatton wrote:synXero wrote:Surely the free reving idea is rubbish.![]()
I would've thought the primary resistance to the engines ability to rev is overwhelmingly the resistance of the tyres on the Tarmac.The speed of engine revs with the clutch disengaged doesn't interest me even slightly nor you I expect.
Take weight out of the car and or driver, that is the only way to make a car free reving
ashman wrote:I agree that losing the harmonic balancer in the crank pulley could be a bad thing, but I'm not sold on a light weight flywheel being an issue- as long as it is properly balanced of course.
Peter Gidden - SBITS wrote:rev3turbo wrote:tbh you wont need to alter your driving style at all.
calum4492 wrote:no hijacking the thread here but are u planning fly by wire system for the 4 throttle bodys? if so will be very interesting to see