Which flywheel?
12-19-2003, 11:15 PM
#1
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London, Ontario, CANADA
Posts: 2,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which flywheel?
I have a 69 camaro 010 block that's been bored .030 and fitted with a 400 crank (383)... I really wanted manual and I'm not ready to go T56, so I picked up a 91 world class T5. The flywheel that came with it doesn't go on...
I know I need 153 tooth 3 5/8" pattern flywheel... where can I get one? And does anyone want to trade for the one piece unit I have?
I'm aware that my 400 crank is externally balanced... and I'm planning to use the "balancing plate" with the correct internal balance flywheel and a stock 400 damper.
Once I toast this WC unit I will be replacing the box with a Tremec thirdgen retrofit T56 that bolts to a T5 bellhousing.
Thanks.
I know I need 153 tooth 3 5/8" pattern flywheel... where can I get one? And does anyone want to trade for the one piece unit I have?
I'm aware that my 400 crank is externally balanced... and I'm planning to use the "balancing plate" with the correct internal balance flywheel and a stock 400 damper.
Once I toast this WC unit I will be replacing the box with a Tremec thirdgen retrofit T56 that bolts to a T5 bellhousing.
Thanks.
Last edited by johnyIROC; 12-19-2003 at 11:22 PM.
12-20-2003, 08:12 AM
#2
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
You need a flywheel for a 83-85 Camaro / Firebird with a 305.
You almost certainly will need to get the correct inner bolt hole drilled in your block that you will need for the starter that fits that flywheel. The block didn't come with that hole from the factory, and unless someone has added it, you won't be able to put a starter on it that works.
You almost certainly will need to get the correct inner bolt hole drilled in your block that you will need for the starter that fits that flywheel. The block didn't come with that hole from the factory, and unless someone has added it, you won't be able to put a starter on it that works.
12-20-2003, 08:31 AM
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 2,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '86 Camaro, '02 WRX, '87 K5, '67
Engine: 350 TPI, 2.0turbo, 383 in the works, 289-4BBL, 232, A-head 4-cylinder
Transmission: T56, 5-speed, 700R4, C4, T176, semi-auto 2-speed
Axle/Gears: 3.73, 3.90, 4.88, 3.55, 3.54, 7.00
A 305 flywheel won't have the correct balance for your engine. All small blocks, except the 400, are internally balanced. The 400 uses an external balance. flywheels for 400s are nearly impossible to find, because so few were used in factory applications (most 400 cars had an auto).
You will need an aftermarket flywheel to make this work. There are plenty available, though they aren't cheap. Another option would be to internally balance the motor, which isn't a big deal if you don't have it in the car yet. This will yield a better engine, as well as making the flywheel problem a lot simpler, since all you will need is a flywheel from any pre-87' car with a 305 and a T5.
When swapping to a T56 you will need a custom flywheel, because the LT1 uses a 1-piece rear main seal, and it's flywheel won't work on your motor. I bought mine from McLeod. They are pretty pricey though, so be sure to factor in this cost when you figure out how much the T56 swap is going to cost.
You will need an aftermarket flywheel to make this work. There are plenty available, though they aren't cheap. Another option would be to internally balance the motor, which isn't a big deal if you don't have it in the car yet. This will yield a better engine, as well as making the flywheel problem a lot simpler, since all you will need is a flywheel from any pre-87' car with a 305 and a T5.
When swapping to a T56 you will need a custom flywheel, because the LT1 uses a 1-piece rear main seal, and it's flywheel won't work on your motor. I bought mine from McLeod. They are pretty pricey though, so be sure to factor in this cost when you figure out how much the T56 swap is going to cost.
12-20-2003, 08:57 AM
#4
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
This is what I mean about this whole topic....
He already said he was going to use a "pork chop", so he would need a normal 305/350 flywheel. Personally that's not the way I would do it, but it at least works, and eliminates the need for an "unbalanced" flywheel.
Actual 400 flywheels wouldn't work anyway because they are 14" and will not fit in the bell housing for these cars.
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel. The vast majority of them are 14" diameter, and will also not fit in the bell housing for one of these cars. The easiest way to get the right flywheel is to get the one for a 83-85 V8 F car, as I previously posted, since that will be the correct diameter to fit the car (duh) and the correct bolt pattern to fit the 85-back crank (also duh).
Internally balancing a 400 IS a big deal, unless money (for Mallory metal) is no object, or unless longer rods and an aftermarket crank are used. It's impossible to internally balance one with the stock rod length which is why it's externally balanced in the first place.
Another option, in fact the one I used when putting a 400 into my T-5 car, was simply taking the 305 flywheel to a machine shop and having it "unbalanced" to the stock 400 spec by drilling holes around the edge. IMHO that's the most sanitary way to deal with the situation.
At least the comment about the T-56 flywheel is somewhat accurate even if not applicable to what the post is asking about, since there has never been a T-56 mated to a 2-piece rear main seal block. However, it only applies to a stock T-56, and not to the Tremec retrofit thirdgen one of which the original post speaks, which is made to be a direct bolt-in in place of a T-5.
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
He already said he was going to use a "pork chop", so he would need a normal 305/350 flywheel. Personally that's not the way I would do it, but it at least works, and eliminates the need for an "unbalanced" flywheel.
Actual 400 flywheels wouldn't work anyway because they are 14" and will not fit in the bell housing for these cars.
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel. The vast majority of them are 14" diameter, and will also not fit in the bell housing for one of these cars. The easiest way to get the right flywheel is to get the one for a 83-85 V8 F car, as I previously posted, since that will be the correct diameter to fit the car (duh) and the correct bolt pattern to fit the 85-back crank (also duh).
Internally balancing a 400 IS a big deal, unless money (for Mallory metal) is no object, or unless longer rods and an aftermarket crank are used. It's impossible to internally balance one with the stock rod length which is why it's externally balanced in the first place.
Another option, in fact the one I used when putting a 400 into my T-5 car, was simply taking the 305 flywheel to a machine shop and having it "unbalanced" to the stock 400 spec by drilling holes around the edge. IMHO that's the most sanitary way to deal with the situation.
At least the comment about the T-56 flywheel is somewhat accurate even if not applicable to what the post is asking about, since there has never been a T-56 mated to a 2-piece rear main seal block. However, it only applies to a stock T-56, and not to the Tremec retrofit thirdgen one of which the original post speaks, which is made to be a direct bolt-in in place of a T-5.
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
12-20-2003, 09:29 AM
#5
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 2,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '86 Camaro, '02 WRX, '87 K5, '67
Engine: 350 TPI, 2.0turbo, 383 in the works, 289-4BBL, 232, A-head 4-cylinder
Transmission: T56, 5-speed, 700R4, C4, T176, semi-auto 2-speed
Axle/Gears: 3.73, 3.90, 4.88, 3.55, 3.54, 7.00
I wasn't aware that there was an add-on weight to externally balance a neutral balance flywheel. Thanks for the info.
I also didn't know that it was possible to "unbalance" a 305 flywheel to achieve the correct balance for a 305, but it makes perfect sense. From your original post it looked like you were suggesting that he could just use a 305 flywheel without any balance work and be fine, and this certainly isn't the case, as you well know.
Internal balance is always superior to external balance. I assumed that he was going to have to buy an aftermarket flywheel, which usually run about $400 for steel and considerably more for aluminum. I beleive that a stock 400 can be internally balanced, and the reason this wasn't done from the factory was cost. I also have no idea what he's running in terms of rods, pistons, and crank. The 383 kits on the market now are so cheap that it's hard to believe that anyone cuts down a 400 carank to use it in a 350 anymore, though I'm not saying that this practice is bad or wrong, and you're right that it is simpler to internally balance an engine with a 400 crank with aftermarket stuff.
I do not like the Tremec retrofit T56 option, because it requires the driveshaft and torque arm to be shortened, which is a lot of work, especially when an LT1 T56 will bolt to a 1st gen small block bellhousing flange and requires no other mods. You will need that custom flywheel though. All of this I do know because I already did this swap in my own car, and I researched the hell out of it before I spun the first wrench.
I also know that he will have to use a 153 tooth flywheel with the T5, which is good because he'd have to buy a new starter when going to the T56 anyway. The block may or may not be drilled for the right starter. It depends on its original application. Truck blocks always used the biger flywheel, but a lot of cars, even high performance ones used the 153 in '69. Some blocks are even double drilled, often these were "service replacement engines", which had to be universal.
I don't claim to know everything there is to know about cars, but I have been working on them and studying them for a very long time. I learn something new every day, and anyone who doesn't needs to read more. I don't appreciate the implication that I don't know what I'm talking about. I try to give the best advice with the information that is given and the knowledge base that I have. Sometimes I'll undoubtedly be wrong, but most of the time I'm not.
I also didn't know that it was possible to "unbalance" a 305 flywheel to achieve the correct balance for a 305, but it makes perfect sense. From your original post it looked like you were suggesting that he could just use a 305 flywheel without any balance work and be fine, and this certainly isn't the case, as you well know.
Internal balance is always superior to external balance. I assumed that he was going to have to buy an aftermarket flywheel, which usually run about $400 for steel and considerably more for aluminum. I beleive that a stock 400 can be internally balanced, and the reason this wasn't done from the factory was cost. I also have no idea what he's running in terms of rods, pistons, and crank. The 383 kits on the market now are so cheap that it's hard to believe that anyone cuts down a 400 carank to use it in a 350 anymore, though I'm not saying that this practice is bad or wrong, and you're right that it is simpler to internally balance an engine with a 400 crank with aftermarket stuff.
I do not like the Tremec retrofit T56 option, because it requires the driveshaft and torque arm to be shortened, which is a lot of work, especially when an LT1 T56 will bolt to a 1st gen small block bellhousing flange and requires no other mods. You will need that custom flywheel though. All of this I do know because I already did this swap in my own car, and I researched the hell out of it before I spun the first wrench.
I also know that he will have to use a 153 tooth flywheel with the T5, which is good because he'd have to buy a new starter when going to the T56 anyway. The block may or may not be drilled for the right starter. It depends on its original application. Truck blocks always used the biger flywheel, but a lot of cars, even high performance ones used the 153 in '69. Some blocks are even double drilled, often these were "service replacement engines", which had to be universal.
I don't claim to know everything there is to know about cars, but I have been working on them and studying them for a very long time. I learn something new every day, and anyone who doesn't needs to read more. I don't appreciate the implication that I don't know what I'm talking about. I try to give the best advice with the information that is given and the knowledge base that I have. Sometimes I'll undoubtedly be wrong, but most of the time I'm not.
12-20-2003, 01:42 PM
#7
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 2,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '86 Camaro, '02 WRX, '87 K5, '67
Engine: 350 TPI, 2.0turbo, 383 in the works, 289-4BBL, 232, A-head 4-cylinder
Transmission: T56, 5-speed, 700R4, C4, T176, semi-auto 2-speed
Axle/Gears: 3.73, 3.90, 4.88, 3.55, 3.54, 7.00
So do you, but it's only about half of what I wanted to say because it was too long. I'll send the rest when you clean out your mailbox, because right now it's full.
BTW, thanks for the PM rather than continuing this in the public forum.
BTW, thanks for the PM rather than continuing this in the public forum.
Trending Topics
12-20-2003, 06:06 PM
#8
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM #14085720
O.D. : 12.75"
Flange: 3.58"
Clutch: 10.4"
Ring: 153 t
Seal: 2 pc
Wt: 16 lbs (steel)
Will work with your balance plate. Does your balance plate still have the sticker/stamp on it to show direction? If not PM me I'll send info/pic.
O.D. : 12.75"
Flange: 3.58"
Clutch: 10.4"
Ring: 153 t
Seal: 2 pc
Wt: 16 lbs (steel)
Will work with your balance plate. Does your balance plate still have the sticker/stamp on it to show direction? If not PM me I'll send info/pic.
12-20-2003, 10:48 PM
#9
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New Fairfield, CT
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
since there has never been a T-56 mated to a 2-piece rear main seal block.
Yes.. it has... i'm doing it
Well... i'm in the process of doing it. It's not terribly hard but you need access to some machine tools and skills. I basically turned down the OD of the crank snout in order to accept the correct T56 flywheel. Then, it was merely a matter of machining a new, staggered, bolt pattern into the T56 flywheel which would obviousy match the 2 piece crank. The 2 piece bolt pattern lies on a larger bolt circle so with the correct staggering of the holes, none of the holes protruded into each other. Do that and you can use a T56 flywheel with a 2 piece rear main seal block.
Patrick DeGrosse Jr.
12-21-2003, 12:54 PM
#10
Patrick007, that's really unsafe! you are better off buying the 2pc rear main flywheel for the t56 (centerforce is just one that makes it) thats what I used and I feel alot safer knowing is made right and is a lot stronger than the factory cast one with extra holes in it. its just a little $$ to keep walking
12-21-2003, 02:38 PM
#11
Originally posted by RB83L69
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel.
<snip>
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel.
<snip>
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
Let's not bust chops until we can remember when the 1pc. rear main seal started.
thanks
Matthew
12-21-2003, 02:54 PM
#12
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Loveland, OH, US
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
since all you will need is a flywheel from any pre-87' car with a 305 and a T5
Some other people have also already done the 1-piece -> 2-piece RMS mod to the stock T-56 flywheel. Which is not the same as the T-56 ever coming attached to a motor with a 2-piece RMS, since it didn't; somebody modified it that way. The concept isn't that difficult. All the same, I don't think I'd feel too comfortable with that spinning around at 6000 RPM 6" from my only 2 feet. Although, most people modify the flywheel, not the crank; if you do to the crank what you describe, you'll end up with a crank that will only fit that one flywheel in all of creation, and a flywheel that will only fit on that one crank. Most of the time, people enlarge the hole in the center of the flywheel to the 2-piece size, and drill the larger bolt circle in it; at least that way, they can still interchange the motor with other transmissions later on.
12-21-2003, 04:03 PM
#13
Supreme Member
this is why g*d invented Stroker cranks that internally balanced....so you dont have to deal with these kinds of problems
12-21-2003, 10:47 PM
#14
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London, Ontario, CANADA
Posts: 2,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by RB83L69
This is what I mean about this whole topic....
He already said he was going to use a "pork chop", so he would need a normal 305/350 flywheel. Personally that's not the way I would do it, but it at least works, and eliminates the need for an "unbalanced" flywheel.
Actual 400 flywheels wouldn't work anyway because they are 14" and will not fit in the bell housing for these cars.
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel. The vast majority of them are 14" diameter, and will also not fit in the bell housing for one of these cars. The easiest way to get the right flywheel is to get the one for a 83-85 V8 F car, as I previously posted, since that will be the correct diameter to fit the car (duh) and the correct bolt pattern to fit the 85-back crank (also duh).
Internally balancing a 400 IS a big deal, unless money (for Mallory metal) is no object, or unless longer rods and an aftermarket crank are used. It's impossible to internally balance one with the stock rod length which is why it's externally balanced in the first place.
Another option, in fact the one I used when putting a 400 into my T-5 car, was simply taking the 305 flywheel to a machine shop and having it "unbalanced" to the stock 400 spec by drilling holes around the edge. IMHO that's the most sanitary way to deal with the situation.
At least the comment about the T-56 flywheel is somewhat accurate even if not applicable to what the post is asking about, since there has never been a T-56 mated to a 2-piece rear main seal block. However, it only applies to a stock T-56, and not to the Tremec retrofit thirdgen one of which the original post speaks, which is made to be a direct bolt-in in place of a T-5.
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
This is what I mean about this whole topic....
He already said he was going to use a "pork chop", so he would need a normal 305/350 flywheel. Personally that's not the way I would do it, but it at least works, and eliminates the need for an "unbalanced" flywheel.
Actual 400 flywheels wouldn't work anyway because they are 14" and will not fit in the bell housing for these cars.
The same thing applies to "any pre-87" flywheel. The vast majority of them are 14" diameter, and will also not fit in the bell housing for one of these cars. The easiest way to get the right flywheel is to get the one for a 83-85 V8 F car, as I previously posted, since that will be the correct diameter to fit the car (duh) and the correct bolt pattern to fit the 85-back crank (also duh).
Internally balancing a 400 IS a big deal, unless money (for Mallory metal) is no object, or unless longer rods and an aftermarket crank are used. It's impossible to internally balance one with the stock rod length which is why it's externally balanced in the first place.
Another option, in fact the one I used when putting a 400 into my T-5 car, was simply taking the 305 flywheel to a machine shop and having it "unbalanced" to the stock 400 spec by drilling holes around the edge. IMHO that's the most sanitary way to deal with the situation.
At least the comment about the T-56 flywheel is somewhat accurate even if not applicable to what the post is asking about, since there has never been a T-56 mated to a 2-piece rear main seal block. However, it only applies to a stock T-56, and not to the Tremec retrofit thirdgen one of which the original post speaks, which is made to be a direct bolt-in in place of a T-5.
It's amazing how this subject consistently brings out all the people who have never done this, telling everybody all about how it should be done..... and they're practically always wrong.
Thanks... that's the answer I was looking for. While I aprreciate how eager everyone is to help, I wish people would read before they jump in...
I think I'm going to go with a factory two piece 3 5/8" 153 tooth flywheel and use a balance plate and a ring gear scatter shield (I might be a *****... but I also enjoy being able to walk when my ride is being modded) I found a great aftermarket flywheel (14lbs steel) on ebay, but I'm not sure if it's compatible with the balance plate.. and I lost the auction in the last 30 seconds
Thanks guys!
12-23-2003, 02:49 AM
#15
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New Fairfield, CT
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really think it's that unsafe to use a T-56 flywheel with a 2 piece RMS block by drilling the extra holes. I mean as long as you stagger them so that they don't touch any other bolt hole it will be just as strong. The reason I was gonna turn the crank down is because the people who have opened up the ID of the flywheel say the larger ID pokes into the original bolt holes, which I think is far worse than turning the crank down. Although I have to agree that the crank would be useless with any old style tranny. Hmmm... the only thing I don't like about the centerforce one (besides the price ) is that it's actually heavier than the stock T56 flywheel. Great now I'm all concerned about modifying the crank... any other input on this procedure?
Patrick DeGrosse Jr.
) is that it's actually heavier than the stock T56 flywheel. Great now I'm all concerned about modifying the crank... any other input on this procedure?Patrick DeGrosse Jr.
12-23-2003, 05:24 PM
#16
Supreme Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 2,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '86 Camaro, '02 WRX, '87 K5, '67
Engine: 350 TPI, 2.0turbo, 383 in the works, 289-4BBL, 232, A-head 4-cylinder
Transmission: T56, 5-speed, 700R4, C4, T176, semi-auto 2-speed
Axle/Gears: 3.73, 3.90, 4.88, 3.55, 3.54, 7.00
Seriously, I'd just buy an aftermarket flywheel rather than trying to modify a stock one to fit a crank for which it was never intended. Especially considering how fracture prone cast iron is. Do enough clutch dumps or enough hard launches and I bet stress cracks appear between the old bolt holes and the new ones. I just can't really consider this safe.
I guess if the whole thing was done off the car with the proper machine work, and then the old holes were properly welded closed, and the whole thing heat relieved it might be okay, but that probably costs as much as a new flywheel.
I also wouldn't recommend trying to modify the crank in the car. If you go that route I'd take it to a reputable machine shop for the work, and since the crank is just iron too you would need to weld and heat relieve it after modification too.
McLeod offers an alternative to Centerforce, and I'm very happy with mine. P.A.W. sells them fairly reasonably.
I guess if the whole thing was done off the car with the proper machine work, and then the old holes were properly welded closed, and the whole thing heat relieved it might be okay, but that probably costs as much as a new flywheel.
I also wouldn't recommend trying to modify the crank in the car. If you go that route I'd take it to a reputable machine shop for the work, and since the crank is just iron too you would need to weld and heat relieve it after modification too.
McLeod offers an alternative to Centerforce, and I'm very happy with mine. P.A.W. sells them fairly reasonably.
12-23-2003, 07:40 PM
#17
Supreme Member
ya thats probably the best way to do it
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
monte87cortez
Transmissions and Drivetrain
2
09-26-2015 08:10 PM
el_muerte
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Wanted
0
09-16-2015 12:01 AM
