2.8 Flywheel balancing
Discussion
Relative position is the same, as is OD. I didn't check the number of teeth but from what I have read previously I think they are the same. Notably the type 9 and mt75 starters do not have the same number of teeth on their gears (1 difference, can't remember which way though). Also the type 9 starter is 2 bolt and the mt75 is three bolt mounting.
Sorry I know you never mentioned starters but thought I'd get it all down as future ref whilst it's in my mind.
RE the keys, it's a friends place of business, I took my flywheel as I was fairly sure he had a 2.9 one along with the 3 24V V6s that he keeps trying to sell me. I keep forgetting to have a look through that rack for spare keys for my MG B
Carl.
Sorry I know you never mentioned starters but thought I'd get it all down as future ref whilst it's in my mind.
RE the keys, it's a friends place of business, I took my flywheel as I was fairly sure he had a 2.9 one along with the 3 24V V6s that he keeps trying to sell me. I keep forgetting to have a look through that rack for spare keys for my MG B
Carl.
Ceejay73 said:
Sorry I know you never mentioned starters but thought I'd get it all down as future ref whilst it's in my mind.
It's all worth knowing, I have an alloy bellhousing from an XR4x4i which uses a three bolt starter. Bolts come through bellhousing and thread into starter unlike original set up.Couldn't get it to fit because the starter soleniod is further round, more on the side of the starter than the top, and fouled on the chassis
......there must be a way ?
Ceejay73 said:
Richard,
could you measure the thickness of your 2.8 flywheel? As apparently this is where the difference is, (no surprise). I put the vernier caliper on mine today and it was exactly 1" (25.4mm).I also weighed it with spring balance at about 8.4Kg, but the thickness measurement is probably a better judge as to what it is. The difference is supposed to be significant (around 5mm) and I would like to know as if I do turn out to have the heavy 2.9 item I will source a 2.8 one before I reassemble the car.
Cheers,
Carl.
25.4mm on mine.could you measure the thickness of your 2.8 flywheel? As apparently this is where the difference is, (no surprise). I put the vernier caliper on mine today and it was exactly 1" (25.4mm).I also weighed it with spring balance at about 8.4Kg, but the thickness measurement is probably a better judge as to what it is. The difference is supposed to be significant (around 5mm) and I would like to know as if I do turn out to have the heavy 2.9 item I will source a 2.8 one before I reassemble the car.
Cheers,
Carl.
Re-weighed it with spring balance - 8.4kg.
Weighed again with bathroom scales - 6kg.
One thing's for sure - I might not be under 14st after all
Hi all.
I have a 2.8 flywheel on a 2.9 engine with a 2.9 clutch and starter motor. Ford don't change things if they could avoid it. The flywheel is not keyed as fords old production lines just required the builder to grab what was to hand and fit it so parts are interchangable from one engine to another. The sluggshness of this engines pickup is down to a whole mismash of factors, moving parts mass just being one of them. The 2.8s mechanical injection was just reactive to airflow and had little to boost fuel flow unlike the accelerator pump in a carb. The 2.9's Eec 1v had similar issues, again using airflow to determine demand, though the throttle position sensor went some way to improving this. Ford built these things to be average, the ECU's are not matched to individual engines so have to accomodate all the build variations, and the electronics are pretty dumb and relatively slow. That said a lighter flywheel will help pickup and yes they are neutrally balanced. When the cologne was first produced getting more than 50bhp/Ltr was good going, even the mighty Jag straight 6 only made it to 57, now we are lookig at 80 in a NA car and 100 plus for a turbo'd family car.
I have a 2.8 flywheel on a 2.9 engine with a 2.9 clutch and starter motor. Ford don't change things if they could avoid it. The flywheel is not keyed as fords old production lines just required the builder to grab what was to hand and fit it so parts are interchangable from one engine to another. The sluggshness of this engines pickup is down to a whole mismash of factors, moving parts mass just being one of them. The 2.8s mechanical injection was just reactive to airflow and had little to boost fuel flow unlike the accelerator pump in a carb. The 2.9's Eec 1v had similar issues, again using airflow to determine demand, though the throttle position sensor went some way to improving this. Ford built these things to be average, the ECU's are not matched to individual engines so have to accomodate all the build variations, and the electronics are pretty dumb and relatively slow. That said a lighter flywheel will help pickup and yes they are neutrally balanced. When the cologne was first produced getting more than 50bhp/Ltr was good going, even the mighty Jag straight 6 only made it to 57, now we are lookig at 80 in a NA car and 100 plus for a turbo'd family car.
Gassing Station | S Series | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff