Moparts

Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers

Posted By: Hot 340

Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers - 06/26/12 11:24 PM

Can someone give the low down on the pros and cons of these two in comparison? I see that ati makes them out of both materials. Im sure the aluminum will help with performance to a degree but has to come with negatives or they would all be aluminum no?
Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers - 06/27/12 04:46 AM

Years ago I tested a all aluminum BHJ balancer on a NHRA class leagl 340 stocker motor versus the stock balancer,13 lbs versus 7 lbs, no stinking changes on torque or horespower none at all measured Looking back now we should have done that test at the track, not on a engine dyno As far as which one is better at absorbing crankshaft shocks I bet the heavier one is better, maybe not I have both types of ATI dampeners on my motors, I can't tell the differences between them. The motors are not twins so not a decent comparision at all
Posted By: Locomotion

Re: Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers - 06/27/12 05:07 PM

From everything I've read/heard, I would agree with Cab that the heavier one will absorb vibrations/harmonics better than the lighter one. Solid aluminum hubs with are said to contribute to broken cranks and other problems due to no dampening properties. An ideal set-up would be an aluminum center with a steel outer ring which would provide the best of both worlds - lighter weight for faster reving with a heavier outer ring to dampen the vibrations and harmonics. But since the benefits would be minimal with an aluminum center, I simply use a quality steel/steel balancer for durability. (Weight reduction closer to the center of rotation provides less benefit than weight removed further out from the center.)
Posted By: dogdays

Re: Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers - 06/27/12 05:31 PM

The heavier damper will help your crank last longer.

R.
Posted By: Hot 340

Re: Aluminum vs.Steel Dampers - 06/27/12 09:30 PM

Thnks guys... Thats what I needed to know.
© 2024 Moparts Forums