Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

QuarterMaster's Lightweight Driveshaft Replacement

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:05 PM
  #61  
EvoDan2004's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 8
From: New Jersey
There hole setup might remove 15lbs. But how much of it is rotational is the question. It is not 15lbs.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:10 PM
  #62  
Done's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
From: South
It clearly states on the website, it takes off 14.5 of rotating mass.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:11 PM
  #63  
vwjeff's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas and HATING it
Originally Posted by evodan2004
There hole setup might remove 15lbs. But how much of it is rotational is the question. It is not 15lbs.
yeah I just realized this to dan. If had to guess just a few lbs? But it needs to stong...
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:13 PM
  #64  
EvoDan2004's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 8
From: New Jersey
Done.

No one said that till now. Just that the total savings was 14.5

I did not see the web site yet.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:14 PM
  #65  
newMRevoNyne's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
From: Haslet, TX
Yeah, thats what I said, I do know the difference between rotational and static, the mounts of the driveshaft would be static, and like the website says its rotational, I called to confirm and thats what I was told as well.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:15 PM
  #66  
Blue Evo 8's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (40)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,354
Likes: 2
From: New York City
Originally Posted by evodan2004
Done.

No one said that till now. Just that the total savings was 14.5

I did not see the web site yet.

I need to know the truth on the true weight savings here.....
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:16 PM
  #67  
EvoDan2004's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 8
From: New Jersey
Thank you vwjeff. Gladly someone understands me.

If the total savings is 14.5lbs then rotational savings I bet is less. I'm on my cell phone and its hard to explain but you I'm sure understand why.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:20 PM
  #68  
blackdemon's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 0
From: Bronx, NY
Bump for answers
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:26 PM
  #69  
EvoDan2004's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 8
From: New Jersey
Right static weight is non moving parts. Rotational would be moving parts.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:27 PM
  #70  
EvoDan2004's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,984
Likes: 8
From: New Jersey
I'm with u blue evo 8. I need to know too. Hence why I'm making a stick about it. Haah
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:29 PM
  #71  
Spaceball 1's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Weight savings on something like a driveshaft are great even if the weight saved is very small.

The drive shaft spins roughly 4 times faster than your wheels, so if you take out 1 lbs of rotating weight from the drive shaft it would be like taking 1 pound off each wheel.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:31 PM
  #72  
dudical26's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
From: NNJ
I was interested in the Devo shaft a few months back and I called to speak to them about it. They said that it removes one of the carriers and one of the joints in the shaft. The carrier is where you save most of the weight, and part of the carrier is rotational while part of it is not. They said that the driveshaft itself has to be made a bit thicker because it is longer without a joint and as a result the SHAFT only is a bit heavier.

Overall I took it that the back half of the shaft which gets replaced gains a tiny bit of weight, but the carrier goes away. I don't know how much the carrier weighs but I would guess about 14lbs or so. I am pretty sure almost all of the weight savings is from removing the carrier. I don't know what portion of the carrier is rotational so I can't say what is saved there.
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:38 PM
  #73  
PURE EVIL 8's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (28)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
From: Everywhere, Chicago - Washington DC
i will have that answer on the weight for you in 5 mins...
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:42 PM
  #74  
PURE EVIL 8's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (28)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
From: Everywhere, Chicago - Washington DC
13lbs of rotational mass is taken out by using this driveshaft... most of the weight is shaved off at the joints

1.5lbs is lost by the carrier bearing

thats your answer... for what its worth, everyone who has had the driveshaft installed feels like their car has gotten significantly more responsive....
Reply
Old Jun 17, 2008 | 07:46 PM
  #75  
4G63 T's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
From: MD
basic fundamental of physics.
Originally Posted by evodan2004
Thank you vwjeff. Gladly someone understands me.

If the total savings is 14.5lbs then rotational savings I bet is less. I'm on my cell phone and its hard to explain but you I'm sure understand why.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:11 PM.