DEVO Tuning driveshaft.
sorry buddy.
and the pm was nice.. we was just talking about are thoughts. and i think we might be just thinking in 2 different terms but yet yielding the same results. or maybe im just a retard. who the f knows.
Haha....well I kind of took it wrong too. I guess my mind is so set on so many posters that are quick to disclaim a product or vendor. I know that his post was nothing like that but for a quick second I though.....what a tard. I'm sure his inentions were good. I'll shut up now...haha.
Haha....well I kind of took it wrong too. I guess my mind is so set on so many posters that are quick to disclaim a product or vendor. I know that his post was nothing like that but for a quick second I though.....what a tard. I'm sure his inentions were good. I'll shut up now...haha.
no he is not a tart. lol. i beleave we are both right but i think we have different views with the same out come. him thinking small scale me thinking big scale. not sure yet. but let him reply
As far as feeling a difference from 14lbs unsprung weight reduction? My butt dyno can't feel 10whp maybe yours can
Hotrod magazine did a good test write up on this years ago 30lb flywheel vs a 10lb flywheel and they saw as much as a 22hp gain on a engine dyno not rwhp.I've read a ton on the subject and rotational weight reduction is superior over sprung, but the 10:1 or 4:1 ratios posted all over IMO are excessive. 2:1, IMO is a much more accurate number this is oversimplifying it too. Alot more to Newtons law then that.
This isn't the thread to talk about rotational vs sprung vs hybrid weight. You could always start another or search the older threads. The DEVO piece looks awesome and sure seems to be a great deal and quality product.
As far as feeling a difference from 14lbs unsprung weight reduction? My butt dyno can't feel 10whp maybe yours can Hotrod magazine did a good test write up on this years ago 30lb flywheel vs a 10lb flywheel and they saw as much as a 22hp gain on a engine dyno not rwhp.
I've read a ton on the subject and rotational weight reduction is superior over sprung, but the 10:1 or 4:1 ratios posted all over IMO are excessive. 2:1, IMO is a much more accurate number this is oversimplifying it too. Alot more to Newtons law then that.
As far as feeling a difference from 14lbs unsprung weight reduction? My butt dyno can't feel 10whp maybe yours can
Hotrod magazine did a good test write up on this years ago 30lb flywheel vs a 10lb flywheel and they saw as much as a 22hp gain on a engine dyno not rwhp.I've read a ton on the subject and rotational weight reduction is superior over sprung, but the 10:1 or 4:1 ratios posted all over IMO are excessive. 2:1, IMO is a much more accurate number this is oversimplifying it too. Alot more to Newtons law then that.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
From: Chicagoland
Rotational weight reduction gains are dependent on the diameter where the weight is removed.
All formulas for figuring "moment of inertia" for round objects use mass multiplied by the radius squared. This means dropping a pound off the outside of a 17" wheel is worth over 32 times what dropping a pound off a 3" drive shaft is worth.
To put it another way.... the moment of inertia savings of this drive shaft is about the same as removing one ounce of weight off the outside of each of your wheels.
All formulas for figuring "moment of inertia" for round objects use mass multiplied by the radius squared. This means dropping a pound off the outside of a 17" wheel is worth over 32 times what dropping a pound off a 3" drive shaft is worth.
To put it another way.... the moment of inertia savings of this drive shaft is about the same as removing one ounce of weight off the outside of each of your wheels.
The vendor business is being straighten out...
Most interesting product I've seen in quiet some time. Even if there is NO performance gain, the alignment sure makes me feel better. Hope it all pans out.
Most interesting product I've seen in quiet some time. Even if there is NO performance gain, the alignment sure makes me feel better. Hope it all pans out.
Last edited by Zeus; Jun 27, 2008 at 01:13 PM.
Not necessarily. I used to be a GM product powertrain engineer, and a lot of times it would seem this way. Don't forget about all the re-tooling on the production floor where the parts are actually made, as there are a ton of costs there as well. Sometimes we would make a move to do something just like this, eliminate parts, only to find out the re-tooling costs on the production floor outweighted just leaving the parts there.
Removing parts from an assembly is sometimes just as expensive as adding parts.
I know 100% for a fact the CF driveshaft had good gains.. I did that mod by itself w/o changing anything else.. i could roll into my car on the street in 2nd w/o any wheels spin.. I did the drive shaft and it ripped tires in 2nd.. So the weightloss definitely helped the car spin up quicker and put more power to the tires..
I am sure the DEVO DS has good gains as well.. Maybe not as drasticly as the CF driveshaft because it isnt as light but it also is 1/5th of the price.. You cannot go wrong with the Devo piece if it fits perfect as Dave says it does..
I am sure the DEVO DS has good gains as well.. Maybe not as drasticly as the CF driveshaft because it isnt as light but it also is 1/5th of the price.. You cannot go wrong with the Devo piece if it fits perfect as Dave says it does..
For those concerned, Devo is paying or paid up as a vendor, or a couple other vendors may carry the part. Either way, lapse or not, the DS will be supported for those interested.