↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > Puma (Tdci) > Anyone fitted a dual mass flywheel to tdci
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 3 of 4 <1234>
Print this entire topic · 
martinfiattech



Member Since: 13 Nov 2013
Location: leicester
Posts: 422

England 
Did`ent some transits get a larger front pulley as well to help take some of the vibration away ? Ours are solid.

Myself I`ve changed many dual mass fly wheels due to the driver thinking he was special (very).
It`s all down to how the vehicle is driven, some have done over 150,000 miles before they started to rattle, others barley get to 40,000 miles before they give up.

On transit /sprinter/lvd once you change from dmf to solid you can feel the difference, the engine is a lot harsher / you can feel it`s out of balance, it can and does take toal on the transmission, in our case the clutch plate springs take the brunt of the inertia

As for transmission kick back / inertia how you drive your defender will never be as hard as a minimum wage door stop delivery driver, paid by the number of drops.
These guys keep going even when they're braking on the pistons in there calipers.

So maybe a dmf kit is the way to go, if and when my clutch gives up it will be on my want list Excuse the spelling I`am better with spanners and wires.
Post #355533 4th Sep 2014 9:51am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17240

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
It would certainly be interesting to hear feedback when someone does a DMF conversion.

My instincts are to distrust DMFs since (a) I don't understand why they're necessary (there is no reason why it is impossible to design a decent conventional clutch for the job, even if LR has forgotten how), and (b) the DMF and clutch fitted to the TD5 is such a dog, performs so badly, and is so expensive to replace.

I am personally convinced that it was the dismal performance of the TD5 DMF and clutch the caused LR to switch back to a conventional set-up for the TDCi; shame that the result is worse than the problem it was intended to solve! I cannot accept that it was a cost consideration, since the cost of implementing the change from the Transit's DMF to the production set-up would have been considerable and is likely to outweigh any unit pricing savings.

I had always intended to convert my TD5 Disco2 to a solid flywheel/sprung clutch setup because I am fed up with the DMF wearing out, but I have to admit that the Puma Clutch Experience has cured me of this. When I get round to it, it will get DMF number 3 (it's now at approx 200,000 miles). It frustrated me at 120,000 miles to have to remove a perfectly sound clutch driven plate costing pennies to replace a worn out DMF costing hundreds. At least a TDCi driven plate every 50k miles is cheaper in the long run than a DMF every 100k miles.
Post #355544 4th Sep 2014 10:49am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
munch90



Member Since: 26 Oct 2013
Location: guildford
Posts: 3558

England 
cant see the cost of setting up a solid flywheel for defender was much as there was one already done for the transit solid conversion

we only ever fit a solid conversion as a last resort or owner wont pay for dmf
Post #355548 4th Sep 2014 11:11am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
munch90



Member Since: 26 Oct 2013
Location: guildford
Posts: 3558

England 
I know the solid flywheels have a clutch plate with springs . but the dmf flywheel you can move with 1 finger you cant move the clutch plate springs like that , dmf are much softer if that makes sense

and as I see it the puma engine had a dmf when it came out in the transit first , was it designed to have a dmf ?


Last edited by munch90 on 4th Sep 2014 11:20am. Edited 1 time in total
Post #355550 4th Sep 2014 11:17am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
K9F



Member Since: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 9610

United Kingdom 2008 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
I haven't had any clutch issues to date from my 08 90XS, have no drivetrain or rattle issues.......

Despite the question being asked and 'theorised' answers, what are the distinct advantages if any over a soild with a DMF, and why would anyone wish to go this route if they aren't experiencing any issues with the original setup please? If you go through life with your head in the sand....all people will see is an ar5e!!

Treat every day as if it is your last....one day you will be right!!
Post #355551 4th Sep 2014 11:19am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
ZeDefender



Member Since: 15 Sep 2011
Location: Munich
Posts: 4731

Germany 2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Baltic Blue
If it ain't broke, don't fix it Whistle Tell someone you love them today because life is short.
But shout it at them in German because life is also terrifying and confusing...
Post #355552 4th Sep 2014 11:21am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
munch90



Member Since: 26 Oct 2013
Location: guildford
Posts: 3558

England 
I know what you mean , if you got 75,000 - 100,000 then yes may be worth leaving it alone

but the question was asked first (by me) due to amount of low mileage gearbox problems posted on the forum , so would be worth fitting one if you only got 20,000 30,000 or less from a gearbox
Post #355553 4th Sep 2014 11:24am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
K9F



Member Since: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 9610

United Kingdom 2008 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
In any event if the vehicle is a 'keeper' the clutch will eventually need doing sometime. I'm trying to gauge which at that juncture would be best. Dependant on mileage I suppose I have really answered my own question perhaps?

Noworries4x4 does phenominal mileages wonder what his take on this would be? If you go through life with your head in the sand....all people will see is an ar5e!!

Treat every day as if it is your last....one day you will be right!!
Post #355556 4th Sep 2014 11:31am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17240

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
The only reason for a DMF that I can comprehend is if the engine is so rough running torsionally that the a more complicated damping setup is needed than can be accomodated in the driven plate, ie the geometry of the springs required makes them too large or too numerous to fit in the driven plate.

DMFs have only become necessary with the advent of the modern, light, high-revving diesel engine, which is by its nature not torsionally smooth (by which I mean that the revs fluctuate, and the crankshaft is constantly experiencing an angular acceleration and deceleration). Historically diesel engines were fitted with big heavy flywheels and as a result ran smoothly but were slow revving, low revving, and not responsive. To allow the responsiveness the mass of the flywheel has to reduced to petrol engine levels, whcih means the flywheel no longer has the inertia to smooth the torsional vibrations.

The 'solution' to this is to make the flywheel in two parts. One part is rigidly attached to the crankshaft, provides the rotational inertia necessary to keept the engine running, but does relatively little to damp the torsional vibrations. The other part is (when the clutch is in) rigidly attached to the gearbox input shaft in angular terms and is intended to damp torsional vibrations in the transmission, in effect it is a transmission flywheel. The two are joined by springs which are intended to prevent the worst of the vibration from the engine reaching the sprung part of the flywheel.

Conceptually it isn't a bad idea, but the main failing is the scope for wear and slop in the flywheel, which inevitably results if unpleasant drivability issues such as jutch judder, etc. From the owner's perspective, the downside is that the the flywheel is expensive to replace.

With a traditional, hard sprung dirven plate and solid flywheel, it was very rare to have damper spring problems since the clutch plate was generally worn out before the springs failed. With the DMF setup, or the Pumas solid flywheel but soft-sprung driven plate setup (since softer prongs are needed for the high speed diesel engine characteristics) the springs wear much quicker, and tend to take on a permanent set. This means that on a TD5 you generally need to replace the flywheel long before the clutch, and also means that the TDCi driven plate fails long before it wears out.

Ultimately this is the price we pay for a diesel engine which drives like a petrol engine.
Post #355636 4th Sep 2014 5:32pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
K9F



Member Since: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 9610

United Kingdom 2008 Defender 90 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Stornoway Grey
Great write up Blackwolf. Thumbs Up If you go through life with your head in the sand....all people will see is an ar5e!!

Treat every day as if it is your last....one day you will be right!!
Post #355638 4th Sep 2014 5:41pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
munch90



Member Since: 26 Oct 2013
Location: guildford
Posts: 3558

England 
blackwolf wrote:
The only reason for a DMF that I can comprehend is if the engine is so rough running torsionally that the a more complicated damping setup is needed than can be accomodated in the driven plate, ie the geometry of the springs required makes them too large or too numerous to fit in the driven plate.

DMFs have only become necessary with the advent of the modern, light, high-revving diesel engine, which is by its nature not torsionally smooth (by which I mean that the revs fluctuate, and the crankshaft is constantly experiencing an angular acceleration and deceleration). Historically diesel engines were fitted with big heavy flywheels and as a result ran smoothly but were slow revving, low revving, and not responsive. To allow the responsiveness the mass of the flywheel has to reduced to petrol engine levels, whcih means the flywheel no longer has the inertia to smooth the torsional vibrations.

The 'solution' to this is to make the flywheel in two parts. One part is rigidly attached to the crankshaft, provides the rotational inertia necessary to keept the engine running, but does relatively little to damp the torsional vibrations. The other part is (when the clutch is in) rigidly attached to the gearbox input shaft in angular terms and is intended to damp torsional vibrations in the transmission, in effect it is a transmission flywheel. The two are joined by springs which are intended to prevent the worst of the vibration from the engine reaching the sprung part of the flywheel.

Conceptually it isn't a bad idea, but the main failing is the scope for wear and slop in the flywheel, which inevitably results if unpleasant drivability issues such as jutch judder, etc. From the owner's perspective, the downside is that the the flywheel is expensive to replace.

With a traditional, hard sprung dirven plate and solid flywheel, it was very rare to have damper spring problems since the clutch plate was generally worn out before the springs failed. With the DMF setup, or the Pumas solid flywheel but soft-sprung driven plate setup (since softer prongs are needed for the high speed diesel engine characteristics) the springs wear much quicker, and tend to take on a permanent set. This means that on a TD5 you generally need to replace the flywheel long before the clutch, and also means that the TDCi driven plate fails long before it wears out.

Ultimately this is the price we pay for a diesel engine which drives like a petrol engine.


works in much the same way as the mass damper on freelander props (rubber mounted metal ring ) and as said its to help even out rotataional vibrations

and I think that mainly all diesels now are direct injection has a lot to do with it

there are some petrol engines that have them as well (mainly jap stuff )
Post #355642 4th Sep 2014 5:52pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
MK



Member Since: 28 Aug 2008
Location: Santiago
Posts: 2396

Chile 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White
Nowadays small dieel engines develop big torque and beacuse of their overall size there is no room to fit a proper clutch with a massive flyheel.

Cheap solution: Single mass Flywheel and a disc with sh11ty springs to adsorb angular variations at idle.

less cheap: mercedes, toyota, nissan, mitsu, some ford, etc.

In general, all vehicles fitted with light duty diesel engines are prone to fail in their clutch. Puma 110" SW

.............................................................
Earth first. Other planets later
Post #356067 6th Sep 2014 1:51pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17240

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
Space isn't the reason for a small flywheel - there's enough room in the Defender driveline for a flywheel at least four times the mass of that fitted.

If you fitted a heavy flywheel to a modern, light, high-revving diesel, then several undesirable things will happen:

1) it will take ages to rev up,
2) it will take ages to slow down,
3) there's a good chance that at high engine speeds the flywheel may disintegrate and kill you.

That aside, it would be smooth. Undrivable, but smooth.

More cylinders would help. A straight-eight, provided the angular arrangement of the crankshaft was optimised, would be much smoother than a four.
Post #356091 6th Sep 2014 3:33pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
MK



Member Since: 28 Aug 2008
Location: Santiago
Posts: 2396

Chile 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White
Think you are right on that. Anyways, most brands (of similar design) go for the DMF. All japs trucks we use for geology work never suffer of clutch problems until several 100k miles of abuse. On the other hand a medium size mining company with a fleet of Pumas they need to replace clutches every 50kkm or less. Before with the TD5īs was not that bad. Good enough for me to say the LR design is bad/cheap. Puma 110" SW

.............................................................
Earth first. Other planets later
Post #356094 6th Sep 2014 3:45pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
roel



Member Since: 08 Aug 2009
Location: Lelystad
Posts: 2039

Netherlands 2003 Defender 90 Td5 PU Caledonian Blue
My 90 td5 has now about 90k Miles old and slips ones and a while if I use my powerbox on the road. So is probably on the end off it's life.
So I have to replace probably the DMF too. Evil or Very Mad Roel

1984 90 2.5 na Diesel - RR V8 (1994-2001)
1997 Camel Trophy Discovery 300TDI (2001-2009)
2005 G4 Discovery III 4.4 V8 (2008-2018) It's gone but it still hurts.
2003 90 Td5 (2009-now)
Post #356200 7th Sep 2014 7:34am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 3 of 4 <1234>
All times are GMT + 1 Hour

Jump to  
Previous Topic | Next Topic >
Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums