Has anyone with the sbc dd tried a fluid dampener yet to take care of the rattle in neutral? It rattles more than I expected and would like to try and quiet it down a little and also did you guys say the whisping sound(sounds like the throughout bearing is going out) when you push the clutch in, goes away after you get some miles or not? I love the holding power and shifting manners are fine but I would like to adress the noises in neutral and with the clutch pushed in.

I haven't personally tried the fluidampr on a Duramax but I'm positive it won't make a noticable difference on transmission rattle. To tame the noise a little put a little lucas oil or redline shock proof oil in the transmission, it will make a noticable difference but won't completely eliminate the noise.

the noises are here for good, lucas did help a bit but not much!!!

Run don't walk in the opposite direction of Fluidampner. -:t

Bad experience with a fluid dampener Guy?

Bad experience with a fluid dampener Guy?

Cost me alot of money in DNFs and broken motors. Finally talked to some of my Winston Cup buddies and got confirmation...........-:t

How much lucas oil, a qt.? Does the noise when you push the clutch in get any quieter with more miles on the clutch?

What kind of noise do you have when you push the clutch pedal in?

Run don't walk in the opposite direction of Fluidampner. -:t

But Gale Banks endorses it.:rolleyes: They just did one on Extreme 4x4.:blahblah:

How much lucas oil, a qt.? Does the noise when you push the clutch in get any quieter with more miles on the clutch?

I added two quarts, and i am also pushing 6500 miles on my kit and the noise has yet to get any quiter!!! Just have to play the radio louder!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Caleb

But Gale Banks endorses it.:rolleyes: They just did one on Extreme 4x4.:blahblah:


Even more reason not to buy one!!!!!!!!!

Has anyone with the sbc dd tried a fluid dampener yet to take care of the rattle in neutral? It rattles more than I expected and would like to try and quiet it down a little and also did you guys say the whisping sound(sounds like the throughout bearing is going out) when you push the clutch in, goes away after you get some miles or not? I love the holding power and shifting manners are fine but I would like to adress the noises in neutral and with the clutch pushed in.


The bad throw outbearing noise is just the plates sliding past each other nothing to worry about, just annoying huh? oh yeah it dosent go away either!!!

ati super-dampner is the only way to go if you want your motor to live.

Yeah its a little anoying. I went through the drive thru the other day and when I was waiting in line to pay it was amplified by the brick building that I was sitting next to, I'm sure everyone who hears it thinks what a junker but little do they realize. So if the trans hold about 6.6 qts then you just put in 4.6 qts of trans fluid and topped it of with the lucas right.

sort of i drained out about 2 quarts and then added but either way will work, dont expect maricals it only helps it dosent by far make it go away!

Goodluck,
Caleb

ati super-dampner is the only way to go if you want your motor to live.

:exactly:

Does ATI make a dampner for the DuraMax?

Trippin;

a couple questions: the three engines that failed (due to Fluidampr ) were they gassers or diesels?

if ati makes a better one than Fluidampr, how is it different?

Thanks,

I did some research and found some info which I posted here:

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=67105

Why does Fluidampr fail? Since no answers I am doing some more research and will post some links for those interested. Looking at the ATI site there are no diesel dampers but they do make custome ones.

I found a couple of gasser forums where racers were discussing Fluidamprs. I pasted a couple of posts and below them are the forums if you wish to check then out. The last one was pretty lengthy. It appears that the real problem is with the crankshafts that are selected for racing engines, and rpm levels not matching the fluid dampers. BTW, ATI has failed also.

Also, I will see what I can find regarding diesel pickups use of this product.

Post: so if ATI makes the better product, why do half the cars in pro stock run a fluidamper? are WJ and KJ gonna risk $200k motors on a $400 damper cause they get them for free?


Post: im sure both brands work great. every test graph ive seen (and i have seen many in recent months) shows something different. i know ati pulleys are great or nascar wouldnt run them, enough said. i also know jim as well as many others wouldnt run fluidamper if they didnt work.
for me its not a question of is one better than the other, avaiablilty was my deciding factor. ati simply doesnt offer an off the shelf pulley for h series, fluidampr does period. also when i spoke w/ ati, they quoted me close to 600 to assemble one for h series, fluidampr off the shelf for 350. easy decision
i will put it to the test this season, i was making close to 270 on a dynojet last season w/ 195 wtq. i plan to make a little more this season also im not too worried because w/ power peaking @ 7600 rpm, i dont have to rev to 10k or even 9k. thats why i like my h series
thanks for everyones imput, ill keep you posted on how much i notch the rail.
Source Forum: http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1501214&page=3

Post: OK, I have done some research and talked to a few people that know what is going on.
There is some mis information here and I will try to clear it up.
SCAT does not recommend using a fluid damper on their "CAST" Scat cranks. Not all their cranks just the CAST ones. The reason for this is due to the material the crank is made of it has a frequency that "CAN" be a problem with a fluid dampner. They had problem with their budget circle track CAST cranks.
Also fluid dampers are made/tuned to absorb/control harmonics in a wide RPM band NOT narrow, while elastomer/stock type dampers are tuned/made to absorb/control harmonics in a narrow/specific range.
So unless you are using a CAST crank from China (where SCAT gets theirs), you shouldn't have a problem with a fluid damper.
This is why I asked where this information came from, like most things the story tends to change as it is told from one person to another. By the end the story is no longer like it started. In this case somewhere in the translation ALL cranks were lumped in with the CAST Scat crank. You can even use them on a Scat steel crank, so it is not even all Scat cranks.
I have used them on cast Chevy cranks, aftermarket nodular iron cranks, and on steel cranks and NEVER had a problem. I have NOT used them on a Scat CAST crank so that may be the difference.
Hopefully this clears up the situation and fixes the "rumors" for now. Maybe it will help someone here
Source Forum: http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/harmonic-balancer-question-31716.html




Post: Just about a year ago I disasembled during the off
season and found my BBF Scat crank cracked. It
was a "Cast Steel" 9000 series 4.300" stroker. My
521 BBF is a real puppy motor making about 640 HP
on alky. It made it thru the whole season, but failed
magnaflux and had cracks in the front and rear rod
journals at the end of the 2001 season. The Scat
folks blamed it on my Fluidampr and assured me their
cranks were good to 800+ HP and that I was NOT over
powering the material. Two other mfgrs also told me
the Fluidampr could have been the problem. So I
decided to give Scat one more chance and bought a
replacement crank. I also switched to an ATI damper.

Well here we are one year and 120 runs later. Engine
ran flawlessly all season. Disassembled over the
weekend. Main and rod bearings looked really good and
crank journals were beautiful. Machine shop mag'd
crank this afternoon and....... ITS CRACKED!!!!!!!
Rear rod journal only this time.

Response Post: I find it hard to beleive that a Fluidamper would do any damage to a so-called "upgraded" crank. Think about it, if the SCAT 9000 casting material is supposedly stronger (higher tinsle strength) than a production iron cast crank, then it would be reasonable to assume that it would be much more resistant to fatigue or torsional stresses than its factory counterpart. And yet, I have seen literally 100's of stock cast cranks take outrageous abuse with Fluidampers attatched to them at the local drags and mudbogs. The thick viscous fluid style damper is a product thats straight out of the aerospace technology realm. It has been used quite successfully in commercial diesel truck applications....and everyone knows how severely they can twist a crankshaft! between 2000 lb.ft of torque and 80,000 lbs, you just know that the rod journals dont quite stay in line until it speeds up and the amount of thrust (torsional twist) begins to level off. I have run many 351 Clevelands to 9200 RPM's with stock (although very well prepped) cast cranks with zero balance Fluidampers on them, one was a twin turbo'd monster that laid down 796 lb.ft torque @ 4100 RPM's!....something I would'nt try with a rubber/elastomer style.
So why would SCAT recomend avoiding a Fluidamper? to cover their own butt's, I guess. Maybe they have a special deal going with ATI or some other manufacturer? I donk know. I think (and this is my own opinion...Im not trying to force it on anyone) that SCAT is using an inferior material that is more prone to movement of the grain structure under moderate to heavy loads of torsional twist and vibration. I beleive it would be more economical in the long run to invest in a billet crank if the cast stuff is failing every year. Eventually, you'd end up spending more on the replacement cast cranks (as in buying more than one), than you'd spend on one quality billet piece. But what constitutes a "quality" billet piece? SCAT?...hmmmmm. Well, Crower comes to mind first!


Source Forum: http://www.network54.com/Forum/85220/thread/1046296888/Scat+9000+-+The+Jury+is+back+in

I dont know, fluidamper is a very good company i do know that every bigtruck going down the road with atleast a caterpiller engine has one on it that has to say something about it! i think they are a good product but i'm not convinced they will help with the 6 speed rattle but i guess time will tell it just takes someone to be the test dummie of sorts! i myself will deal with the noise before spending $400+ on something that might not give me the results im looking for from it, JMO though!

Later,
Caleb

I just spoke to Peter and he referred me to another diesel forum where there are some threads on this subject. I am will post them soon if anyone wants to check thm out. Unless I see something that convinces me it is a problem, then I will get one and check it out. I hope to do a check out in the next 2-3 weeks.

It appears that a number of Dodge guys have used the Fluidampr with interesting results:

http://turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153042&highlight=fluidampr

http://turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146914&highlight=fluidampr

http://turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147806&highlight=fluidampr

http://turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148619&highlight=fluidampr

If any of you ZF6 guys are interested let me know and I will get a group buy going. Based on discussions with Peter and all the threads I've read I believe this product will be a very good addition to trucks with SMF DDC.

It appears that some people are saying the noise is coming from the tranny......I thought it was from the clutch/flywheel? If it is coming from the tranny, I see how that possibly could be a future problem.:confused:

Trippin;

a couple questions: the three engines that failed (due to Fluidampr ) were they gassers or diesels?

if ati makes a better one than Fluidampr, how is it different?

Thanks,

8,000+ rpm circle track gassers.
I used to build Competitive racing engines on the West Coast. Nascar Winston West, Southwest Tour, Late Model etc. And some drag stuff.

I had a customer with one of my engines fail about 5 races into the season. The initial inspection revealed what appeared to be a broken rod bolt. The rod bearings looked good, but the mains were terrible. Interesting as these were Carrillo rods with Carr rod bolts. The rod bolts were $300.00 a set at the time and were considered indestructible.

We built a new motor and transfered all of his accessories over from the old one. Clutch, dry sump pump, dampener, pulleys, carb, dist etc. While running it on the dyno we noticed it was down about 20 hp from where it should be.

Checking the filters revealed some bearing material. We tore it down and confirmed our suspicions:

#1 main perfect except for one little shiny area
#2 main worn into the copper
#3 main perfect except for one little shiny area
#4 main worn into the copper
#5 main perfect except for one little shiny area

All the rod bearings had that little shiny area in them just like the mains.

We checked rechecked and checked everything again. It all checked out without any explanation as to what was causing the worn bearings. I called one of my friends who worked in the engine shop at one of the top teams in Winston Cup and asked for his opinion. He said it sounded like some sort of harmonic was going through the motor and causing the problem. He asked about the balance job as we used to over balance the cranks back then by approx. 2%. Same as Cup.

He then asked if I we were running a Fluidampener by any chance. Then went on to explain all the trouble they had in Cup with them.

I took the crank over to the balance machine as we did our balancing in house and verified the balance. Then bolted on the flywheel and verified balance, then bolted on the Fluidampener and again verified balance. Everything checked out. I figured that if the viscous fluid had hardened I would see an out of balance condition. :help2:

I called Fluidampener and asked if I could send it back to have it analyzed. The said sure and that they would replace it free of charge. I asked if I would be provided with a copy of the lab report. The said no, they would replace the part and that was it.

This bothered me as I was looking for answers not just replacement parts. As an engine builder I need a way to qualify new and used parts (during rebuild) before I install them into a $20,000- $35,000 motor.

I reassembled the engine and this time used an ATI dampner. The engine ran perfect and my 20 hp was back. I ran it through some extensive endurance cycles which brought the boss out of his office wanting to know if I was actually trying to break it this time. I responded "Yes". "Better to break it here than out on the race track." It took the abuse without any problems.

Next I dropped the pan on the dyno and inspected all the bearings. Everything was perfect. :D

Only one thing left to do. Re-install the Fluidampener and see if it causes a problem. This caused the boss to leave for the rest of the day mumbling something about getting a couple of drinks on the way home and how I was out of my mind.:eek:

I ran two really quick easy tests to 7,000 rpm and everything looked good. A little down on power but no bearing material in the filters. I then ran two quick tests to 7,500 and checked the filters and low and behold, bearing material. A quick drop of the dry sump pan to inspect the bearings revealed the same pattern we had seen before with every other main bearing wearing out. Obviously some harmonic frequencies were causing the crankshaft to move around like a limp noodle, and eventually caused the rod bolt to break in the first motor.

End Test. ;)

Interesting to note that the Fluidampener was fine for about five 200 lap races and probably an equal amount of practice. Yet without a way to inspect or determine what went wrong or even distinguish between a good one or a bad one how can we continue to use this company's product?

Next, we had a customer that had a perfectly fine running engine decide to install a Fluidampener because his buddies read it was supposed to be the next greatest thing to sliced bread. He brought the thing in with a hole in the side of it, madder than a Hornet. We pulled his work order and showed him where we had installed an ATI and now the motor had a Fluidampener. We then predicted what the motor would look like inside and proceeded to disassemble it in front of him. He wrote a big check and walked out mumbling something about suing Fluidampener.

Over the years I have had many a racer call me looking for answers to his main bearing problems or broken crank problems that cropped up seemingly out of the blue, and in 99% of the cases a Fluidampner was to blame.

You guys do what you want. I'm just offering my experiences. Whether you use my advice or buy into the marketing hype printed on somebody's web site is up to you.

As for me, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Until ATI comes up with a Dmax unit, I'll run stock thank you.

:rant:

Good enough for me..Thanks Guy...:)

Thanx for the info Guy,very interesting!

Now if we could just get a dmax to say 7000 rpms:eek: , that would be better than taking a whole bottle of viagra at once,:lol: !!!

Thanx,
Caleb

Thanx for the info Guy,very interesting!

Now if we could just get a dmax to say 7000 rpms:eek: , that would be better than taking a whole bottle of viagra at once,:lol: !!!

Thanx,
Caleb

Steve Cole and I used to talk about how high we could actually turn a diesel. We would have to know the burn rate of Diesel fuel at 23,000-26,000 psi. Factor in pulse width based on injector flow and the amount of fuel needed to support some given HP at that rpm.

Then get all the hard parts strong and light enough to go there. :D

so in theory what will she spin? :)

Guy;

Thanks for your detailed response! Will help all who read it, including me.

If it dose that will be great!!!!! keep us posted!

Caleb