Fluidamper
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Beaumont, Tx
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fluidamper
do those fluidamper dampers really work, and are they really worth putting on your truck if your not bombing the heck out of it, and does anyone here have one? have yall gained any fuel mileage from using it? are they worth the money for what the stated claims are? just curious.
#2
I say if your not going stupid on power and drag racing or sled pulling and turning high rpm's then I wouldn't worry about it. It can only help but I'd have a hard time justifying that kinda money for a difference that I'm not noticing. I'm sure some will come on here and tell you that your doing your engine a favor by getting rid of harmful vibrations and it'll last longer but cummins designed these engines with the factory dampner in mind and they last 500k+ so I really don't see a need for it unless your using your motor above and beyond it's limits.
#4
Registered User
I agree with what Tyler and Rowland posted, with the qualification that if you've installed an aftermarket clutch in front of a G56 with the dual/mass flywheel, the FluidDamper is much more beneficial due to it's cancellation of the CTD's notorious harmonics/vibration, which can otherwise shorten the lifespan of the G56's internals.
Of course, Peter has recently announced the new dual-mass SB clutch just for the G56!
p.s. and yes, I realize this is the 2nd gen forum - never know who might be reading it!
Of course, Peter has recently announced the new dual-mass SB clutch just for the G56!
p.s. and yes, I realize this is the 2nd gen forum - never know who might be reading it!
#5
Registered User
rowjand big blue are right its not really needed but if your stock dampener is really haggard like mine was then go ahead if you feel comfortable loosing the money for no real power. but the engine does feel a bit smoother and not as pingy if thats the right word to use.
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hershey, PA
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just food for thought.
Doug
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fredericksburg, virginia
Posts: 3,465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well lets see..... In the 24v arena that would be anything over 235 or 245 (HO) crank HP. When we add more fuel, different boost, egt, rpm, torque, HP, etc the original cummins design is kinda out the window. Is a Fluidampr necessary, well probably not for the average Joe but nobody has really done a long term scientific study to prove or disprove it either way. I can tell you it will quieten a DD clutch a bunch and to do this it must be doing something. But if HP gains are what you are looking for a Fluidampr won't make a hill of beans different.
Just food for thought.
Doug
Just food for thought.
Doug
Trending Topics
#8
While I agree doug that cummins designed it for 245hp and that double or tripling the power is above and beyond what they designed it for, how many people have trashed a motor from using the stock damper at those power levels? Guess it's hard to prove though. Guess we need two 600+hp engines, one with a stock damper and the other with a fluidampr, and two engine dynos. Any donations?
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hershey, PA
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyler,
Actually I think what we need would be several trucks setup exactly the same and driven for a long time. Then tear them down and inspect wear. Heck we could even try the same test on two stock engines. We need to remember Cummins designed these engines but cost was part of the design. Every penny they can save impacts their bottom line..... I am not saying the OEM dampr is junk, just that with all components there might be a better option out there.
Doug
Actually I think what we need would be several trucks setup exactly the same and driven for a long time. Then tear them down and inspect wear. Heck we could even try the same test on two stock engines. We need to remember Cummins designed these engines but cost was part of the design. Every penny they can save impacts their bottom line..... I am not saying the OEM dampr is junk, just that with all components there might be a better option out there.
Doug
#11
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: W-S, NC
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mine seems to run smoother now, but I also just had headwork/springs, lower compression, etc done. Could probably be attributed to the headwork, but Peter at SBC said it would be a good idea when I got the DD and I just thought it might help driveline noise in general. Nothing too major to report, but definitely better overall.
#12
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Beaumont, Tx
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the replys guys. i didnt know to much about this one, but i guess it boils down to if you want to drop the $300+ bucks on one go ahead and do it. semper
#14
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: W-S, NC
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hershey, PA
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts