X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with ESMTPS id 5118342 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:31:37 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.161.52; envelope-from=wdleonard@gmail.com Received: by fxd18 with SMTP id 18so1795740fxd.25 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=/88zk5xtBg0U6HgX7gj3UOfSrf45KEsRqA5HbrrKlMM=; b=U8k3AQJ2ROuMrf1tEL58r1k+QFxYEvYMfUNgRqoTY7Hqb5sqT65eO4YbaxgRX3X4OW UiyjxLra3AuSvNQuXgDkxLHEwbOmdI7qR4oJjig2iWbXiSN/pY2sr9AM6Ja8DnNnmDf0 fovQarCykL8t2g9bHsL+JgE0S945pXBOvUkLQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.45.18 with SMTP id c18mr1075947faf.86.1315521062217; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.74.143 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 15:31:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Flywheel thickness ? From: David Leonard To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174769409ba6b504ac759dd9 --0015174769409ba6b504ac759dd9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Tracy, Mine is different from the aluminum one that you are looking at, but I wold be pretty sure that they all put the friction surface in the same spot... which would be the same spot as the stock flywheel - if you have one of those. It is, indeed, slightly closer to the gear-box than the current set-up. Mine is not a flat disk, and I wouldn't think that the aluminum are either. I posted a bunch of measurements early in the discussion and they were all pretty close (though I did end up taking a little too much off my starter to get it to reach). I machined down my friction surface, but still had to take a few thou. off the spline to get it to fit. Sorry I cant dig up the numbers right now, in a hurry getting ready to leave for Reno in the Morning. I have about 10 hours on the new flywheel. So far so good. Also, If you follow Paul's site, he is coming up with a very nice solution that may not be too expensive, heavy, or difficult and incorporates a really nice improvement in the rubber dampers too. Dave Leonard On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Tracy wrote: > Question for David, Kelly or anyone else playing with lightweight > flywheels. I have one on the way but won't see it until I get back home in > October. I'm working on a new design to replace the stock flex plate and > need to know the thickness of the lightweight flywheel. Every picture I see > of them appears to show an almost flat disk which would imply that there is > MORE room between it and the redrive adapter plate than there is for the > flex plate which has about a 1 1/4" dish in it. BUT, much of the > discussion seems to imply that if anything, there is LESS. > > Anyone able to tell me the actual thickness of these aftermarket > lightweight flywheels? > > I'm looking at the aluminum versions for weight reasons and also because > the iron friction surface is removable ( for even less weight). > > Tracy > > Sent from my iPad > > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > -- David Leonard Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net http://RotaryRoster.net --0015174769409ba6b504ac759dd9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tracy,

Mine is different from the aluminum one that you are looking = at, but I wold be pretty sure that they all put the friction surface in the= same spot... which would be the same spot=A0 as the stock flywheel - if yo= u have one of those.=A0 It is, indeed, slightly closer to the gear-box than= the current set-up.=A0 Mine is not a flat disk, and I wouldn't think t= hat the aluminum are either.=A0 I posted a bunch of measurements early in t= he discussion and they were all pretty close (though I did end up taking a = little too much off my starter to get it to reach).=A0

I machined down my friction surface, but still had to take a few thou. = off the spline to get it to fit.

Sorry I cant dig up the numbers rig= ht now, in a hurry getting ready to leave for Reno in the Morning.=A0 I hav= e about 10 hours on the new flywheel.=A0 So far so good.

Also, If you follow Paul's site, he is coming up with a very nice s= olution that may not be too expensive, heavy, or difficult and incorporates= a really nice improvement in the rubber dampers too.

Dave Leonard
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Tracy <rwstracy@gmail.com> wrote:
Question for David, Kelly or anyone else playing with lightweight flywheels= . =A0 I have one on the way but won't see it until I get back home in O= ctober. =A0 I'm working on a new design to replace the stock flex plate= and need to know the thickness of the lightweight flywheel. =A0Every pictu= re I see of them appears to show an almost flat disk which would imply that= there is MORE room between it and the redrive =A0adapter plate than there = is for the flex plate which has about a 1 1/4" dish in it. =A0 BUT, = =A0much of the discussion seems to imply that if anything, there is LESS.
Anyone able to tell me the actual thickness of these aftermarket lightweigh= t flywheels?

I'm looking at the aluminum versions for weight reasons and also becaus= e the iron friction surface is removable ( for even less weight).

Tracy

Sent from my iPad



--
Homepage: =A0http:/= /www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: =A0 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists= /flyrotary/List.html



--
David Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
htt= p://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net
http:/= /RotaryRoster.net
--0015174769409ba6b504ac759dd9--