Finally got the car on the road for summer. After all this I can't even notice a difference from the lighter flywheel Oh well, can't expct miracles!

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 11:17 am:

Thanks John, I forgot about the CVCC one.

I actually took a look in Glen Martson's Honda Performance Handbook and it has a picture of one just like mine with a before and after picture (page 91) and it looks as though they took the same amount off, so I'm thinking it should be fine. I will post an update when I get the car on the road.

- Kurt

By John S. (68.93.179.49) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 01:12 am:

You will just have to try it. It will rev quick, but will also drop revs just as quickly, Still, the 1600 Crank IS about 6.5# heavier than a 1500 one, so it may not be as extreme as one might think, rotating mass IS rotating mass, though the larger the arc of the weight rotation does have a multiplying effect, so we are back to you will just have to try it.
It will get you out of any habit you MAY have had of using the engine to brake with, 'cause that won't work anymore, but then that is harder on the engine anyway. I once had a mechanic,(good friend, and a master mechanic) tell me "Brakes are cheaper than Motors", so there you have it.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 05:02 pm:

Thanks, so what does everyone think about this thing....too thin?

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (24.86.60.4) on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 12:01 pm:

kurt, i have a spare stock EL flywheel if you want it

By Kurt (199.212.150.16) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 10:31 pm:

Actually they didn't remove anything from the clutch side. Thats just the marks from when they re plained it last year.

The EK flywheels are different then the Civic ones as they don't have that large outer flange where the pressure plate mounts, insead the clutch face is only slightly recessed.

- Kurt

By Kyle Thomson (24.83.29.123) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 04:27 pm:

Man I wish I had taken pics of mine now. Yours looks quite a bit thinner on the outside edge. I see they also took down the ridge that the pressure plate sits on, how much did they take off there? how much is it going to affect the pressure? or would its just change adjustment and not the pressure?

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 04:14 pm:

Ya, it is thinner than I expected. I'll try it and see how I like it. If not, there are plenty around pick a part

I don't normally do too much hill climbing, but I never knew it made it harder going up hills I never had problems before so we'll see....

By Justin (199.60.112.10) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 02:55 pm:

dang.. that's thin.. But the acceleration will be wicked.. I hope you won't have to much problems on the hills going to Kelowna( Sheridan's was about that thin) and he had to nail it to keep up his momentum up the long hills.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 12:35 pm:

And I just barely saved my timing mark.

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 12:33 pm:

Got my flywheel back today! I only have a bathroom scale but it appears to have came back to about 11-12 pounds from 18.5 pounds

He mentioned something about machining it a certain way on the backside to avoid stress cracks. Will be puting it back in today

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (154.20.95.104) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 09:06 pm:

here are the pics i have

http://www.redpepperracing.com/gallery/after_machine_shop/aam
http://www.redpepperracing.com/gallery/after_machine_shop/aan
http://www.redpepperracing.com/gallery/after_machine_shop/aao
http://www.redpepperracing.com/gallery/after_machine_shop/aap

By Colza (Colza) (219.88.29.59) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 03:59 pm:

My city turbo flywheel is lightened as far as the guy felt was safe, didnt weigh it though. Sadly my timing marks are gone forever and it makes setting th ignition timing somewhat horredous. Guess and check is the usual method =/

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 10:59 am:

Wow, I never said what I wanted it at, just told that the guy knew what he was doing!

I 'extended' my timing marks some time ago with a Dremel along the side so they should show up even if it is turned down on the back side. As long as they don't machine some off the side I'm okay.

I recall there were 3 marks though, I assume the middle mark is the one you adjust the timing by?

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (24.86.60.4) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 10:52 am:

kurt, i have pictures online but the internet sucks at my work so i'll post the links later. they left a thicker spot around the center and left a ridge around the ourside so as not to remove the timing marks. if you want 12 make sure you are VERY specific. i asked for 12 and they even wrote it down but when i weighed it it was 14.5. after some talking with a friend i decided it would be better to keep it as is for the reason colza just posted. i asked around the 84-87 board, their stock weight is around 21lb, they all seem to think 12lb is safe for road use, some have gone as light as 8lb with an aluminum fly

By Jacob (65.113.241.30) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 07:51 am:

Colza, I think your logic is generally correct. But, if you've been driving a stick for a while a lightenend flywheel isn't that bad on the street. My Eclipse (heh, new toy) has a 7.5lb flywheel and is very nice on the street, I actually prefer it since it rev-matches so easily. Granted, I killed it a few times (drives much different than my truck), but it really only takes about a week to get the hang of it.

By John S. (66.143.44.119) on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 01:23 am:

I've weighed both a 1500CVCC and a 1600CVCC cranks, the 1600 is fully counterweghted, and there is about 6.5lbs difference, so I think 6lbs is a safe point, as it would have about the same rotating mass as a stock 1500 setup. However there is a difference in rotating mass as close to a centerline as the crankshaft is, in comparison to the rotating mass of a larger diameter flywheel.
Oh, and if you have already had your engine balanced, altering the flywheel would mess with the balance job, as most shops would want to balance all pieces that are affected directly by the crank together as one rotating unit.

By DaRk (66.50.181.226) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 10:18 pm:

and What about for street?

By Colza (Colza) (219.88.29.42) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 09:48 pm:

A light flywheel will mean the car revs easier, but also loses revs easier. Depending on the output of your motor, and how you launch off the line you may want a light or a heavy flywheel, its up to you. A light flywheel would suit a high output engine that has no trouble spinning the wheels off the line, a heavier flywheel would take longer to spin up but will store more energy to give a lower powered car a helping hand off the line.

Also when changing gears down the track, a very light flywheel may allow the revs to drop too quickly when you back off the gas, where as a heavy flywheel will help keep the revs up (and your turbo on boost) between gears.

I think its only on a track car where you want a super light flywheel, in a drag car a medium weight, and in grandma's road car you put an 18lb'er so she doesnt keep stalling it =P

By Jarcaf (Jarcaf) (207.55.238.216) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 06:01 pm:

I think heavy flywheels make more sense in heavier cars. The mass of the car resists the force of the engine, but the rotating mass of the flywheel helps to overcome the cars resistance. In a light car, it seems like you'd want a lighter flywheel to actually accelerate the engine.

By shnitzel (24.66.80.87) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 05:14 pm:

more on the drag racing issue...

for now i'm more into light to light performance, and was considering lathing my own flywheel then getting it proffesionally balanced...

do you realy think a little heavier is better for this application? if so i'll just leave it alone. i am pretty good at pulling out of the hole, could probably work the motor / turbo to spool up even with a light flywheel.

comments? ha ha ha

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 03:40 pm:

Just pulled it today and it weighed in at 18.5 pounds. Yikes! I just took it into Lordco for the convenience and apparently their guy does a lot of them. I am hoping he takes all the over hang off the back side so its flush like the front. If I can get it to 12 I will be happy, we'll see. How much did they take off the back side of yours Andrew?

I am having a short shifter welded up while the car is apart too

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (154.20.95.104) on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 08:39 pm:

just looked at my recept. i paid Lordco Machine shop in Langley 180 to lighten and remachine the friction surface. stock weight is about 18.5 lb and i had it taken down to about 14.5 lb

By Jarcaf (Jarcaf) (207.55.238.216) on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 04:55 pm:

That's really funny. I just called a machine shop not 15 minutes ago regarding lightening my flywheel for my EK. The boss wasn't in, so I have to call back. Anyways, I was just thinking I might just do it myself in my school's machine shop. We've got several lathes, so I know one would work, but do any of you guys have a picture of the flywheel after lightening? I'd probably cut some mass from the outside, but how much could I take off the back? Am I getting in over my head by doing this?

By Kurt (205.250.75.226) on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 04:34 pm:

Looking at having my EL flywheel machined down to lighten it up. I should have gotten it done before I put the motor in as the thing is huge but oh well.

I recall asking someone before but where in the Vancouver area did you guys/girls have your's done?? Lordco will send mine out for $120 but figured I would see If I could have it done cheaper.

PS - I have a million emails and messages to answer for those of you tryong to reach me.

By Butch Dennis (216.40.234.56) on Wednesday, August 11, 2004 - 05:42 pm:

I have a confession to make. I forgot the basics. The locator pin on the crankshaft is to make sure the timing mark on the flywheel matches TDC. Not just for balance. Thanx to all who remembered this and chose not to flame me for it.

By John S. (205.188.209.248) on Thursday, August 05, 2004 - 03:05 am:

My think is the 1500 crank weighs about 6lbs less than a 1600 full counterweighted crank, haven't weighed one but I'm sure a 1751 crank is heavier still. for street I would say dropping six lbs is reasonable. Too much is worst than not enough in this case as a lighter flywheel tends to put more wear stress on the engine, and it reduces the engine breaking effect which causes you to wear out brake pads quicker all else being equal.

By Butch Dennis (216.40.234.143) on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 10:11 pm:

The std. trans flywheel has enough mass so that the factory can remove weight wherever needed to balance it. The flex-plate for the automatic is so light they have to add weight to balance it. This also lets them neutral balance the torque converter, again usually with counterweights.
Bryan's right, balance that 1300 flywheel and have fun.

By Bryan (209.186.188.219) on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 05:59 pm:

I have never seen a 4 cyl engine that needed a counterwieght to balance it. It is all done inside. If I remember correctly, the 1200 cranks have a dowel and the 1300's don't. It might be the other way around though. I can look at the shop tomorrow if you need me to. Either way, the 1300 flywheel works no problem on the 1200.

By Jonathan (68.193.6.173) on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 05:11 pm:

Butch, were all flexplates counterweighted? Here's why I'm asking, I'm working on converting my Hondamatic to a 5-speed, using a second gen. 5-speed. If the flexplate is counterweighted, wouldn't it be best to use a counterweighted flywheel when converting? I don't think the engines were different internally from Hondamatic to manual.

By Butch Dennis (216.40.234.51) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 11:39 pm:

Sorry, I don't remember which ones had the location pin and which ones didn't. I do remember the machine shop operator telling me that he would balance the flywheels neutral so they could be used on any engine.
The only flywheels Honda had with counterweights on them were the flexplates for the automatics.

By Jonathan (68.193.6.173) on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 07:41 am:

Butch, do you happen to know offhand what engines had flywheels balanced to match the crank throws, and which ones had neutral balanced flywheels? I'm looking at using a second gen 1300 flywheel on my 1st gen CVCC, and was planning on getting it lightened and balanced, but balanced neutrally. Do you think that will be bad, or should I have it balanced for the same amount of offset weight as a 1st gen CVCC flywheel (If there even is any counterweight on one?)?

By Butch Dennis (216.40.234.254) on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 11:56 pm:

I have lightened three flywheels (9 to 9.5 lbs) and still had material that could have been removed. I found the thinest protion of the flywheel (crankshaft flange area) and made sure not to machine any area thinner than that. I had a local shop balance all of them and also had them shot-peened (w/ lead shot) to stress relieve the machined surface. I don't know if it was needed (they shot-peen rods for greater strength, don't they?) but I felt better about racing them to 7,000 to 8,000 rpm (auto-x and circle track). There is a notable difference in the rev-ability of those little engines with less weight on the end. If your drag racing, the heavier flywheel might be a help with inertia coming off the line (the big boys do it, must be good?)
If your crankshaft has a location pin so the flywheel can only go on one way, it was balanced at the factory to match the crankthrows. If there is no pin, the flywheel is usually still balanced but in a neutral manner so it can mount anywhere on the flange.

By Jacob (24.21.158.8) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 05:47 pm:

The flywheel I pulled out of my 1976 1200 was definitely balanced. Quite sure the engine hadn't been opened. Definitely balance your flywheel. As small as our cars are, a misbalanced flywheel is going to make a lot of difference.

I lightened my 1200 flywheel to 8.5lbs.

By Kyle Thomson (24.83.12.187) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 08:17 am:

I installed an EL with the stock civic 4 spd tranny using the original flywheel. I had the flywheel machined from the crank mating surface straight out, all that overhanging part is gone. I'm not sure how much it weighs now but it was a huge difference. I didn't even think about having it balanced until it was already in but I have not had any problems and its been in for a year now

By Zippy (Zippy) (12.106.14.107) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 06:59 am:

As far as I know the stock flywheels are not balanced and balancing the flywheel is not mandatory. However, for the cost, it's a good investment depending on your needs. I had all the reciprocating mass balanced on my last rebuild and feel it made a notable difference in engine performance. It was a smoother running engine with a faster windup.

By Phil (Fireballphil) (63.116.174.254) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 05:27 am:

Andrew---
I have a friend who lightened his stock flywheel for racing/autox locally. He told me it is about 9-10 lbs now. He had no problems with it.

Jonathan---
By all means the flywheel needs to be re-balanced.

Hope this helped guys!

Phil

By Jonathan (68.193.6.173) on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 08:41 pm:

Not to jack the thread here, but along the same lines, if the flywheel is lightened, would re-balancing it be a good idea, or with the weight removed is it not enough weight to make a difference? The local machine shop here said they can lighten the flywheel I have, but not balance it again afterwards.

By -Andrew Smit- (Cvcc_Wagon) (154.20.102.25) on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - 06:21 pm:

i weighed my EK flywheel at work yesterday and it is 18.5 lb and i am wondering how light i can go and still have something that i can run on the street w/o any trouble