I have a fluidamper on my Malibu.. When I researched it (its a 383 CID Supercharged small block that actually sees pretty high RPM for a small block stroker) the unit is composed of a viscous liquid, which the viscosity doesnt change at low temps (within reason) and the one i have has a small counterbalance in there, the fluid does the "fine tuning" so you won't get a severely out of balance situation even if the fluid pooled away from the counterbalance..

 

viscosity goes down with rise in temp.


Eddie Rosado

 

so... are any of these lighter than the stock unit?

 

Kick a$$. The 383 stroker is killer, especially supercharged. If you don't mind me asking, what kind of charger are you running?
Since your 383 is basicly a 350 with a 400 crank, it has to run the counterbalanced 8" 400 cid balancer because a 400 crank is not internally balanced. The counterbalance actually balances the crank and does not do anything for the torsional vibrations. You should also have a counterbalance on your flywheel/flexplate. The 350 crank on the other hand is internally balanced and does not require the counterbalanced damper. Most 350 cranks run the smaller 6 1/2" balancer. Have fun with your blown 383, I bet that thing is a blast to drive. Later.

 

The car is actually insanely powerful and a bit scary to drive on the street.. But your right, its externally balanced on the flywheel, and the harmonic balancer is specifically designed for this application. I definitely feel that the Fluidampr is doing its job as the engine has seen very high RPM's the few times the car has been to the track (along the lines of what we sometimes rev our 4g's to)

I'm running a 144cid supercharger, but a swap is in the works for a twin turbo setup (seeing the engine was built for supporting 25psi of boost or more.) Some have been trying to convince me to leave the supercharger on there and use the turbos also.. But I'm working on an EFI swap at the same time.

 

so... which one is lighter? for are they all about the same as stock or heavier? just there for the protection i presume?

 

This is great.

 

Always good to hear from engine builders.

 

Where you from b?

 

After talking to Carmella at jacson machine shop she told me that ati came to them to help design there fluidamper and they refused. JAM said that ATI and there products were sub-par but to what extent of that is sales talk i dont know. She said from all the products they have tested Fluidamper has been the best for alot less of the cost in all the engine rebuilding
My 2 cents...

 

I think youl find that the OEM community traditionally uses elastomer ring style dampers to control vibration harmonics for reasons of cost. Most oem engines do not require the performance of a fluid style damper, and thus do not want to pay the extra cost.

However, in high toqrue diesel applications, where harmonic torsional bending can be extreme, you will find that viscous dampers are much more widely used, simply because they offer superior damping performance and have longer life in extreme conditions as compared to elastomer units, at the expense of extra cost.

Now which one of the two is better in this case? I dont know. Design and principle is one thing, execution is another.

 

Fluidampr actually started in diesel applications. You are correct.

Each damper has advantages over the other and different fit characteristics.

TTP is now selling Fluidampr units at $270 shipped if you mention this post.

 

Use loctite!!! Ive had some of the bolts back out before

 

Loctite Red was used.

 

why won't anyone tell me the weight?