Go Back   986 Forum - for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners > Porsche Boxster & Cayman Forums > Performance and Technical chat

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-30-2013, 04:16 PM   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
981 with PDK still need DMFW

Curious;
987 & 981 with PDK still require dual mass flywheel to decouple the engine and the transmission?
Or do the new design have forged crank and or beefed up engine main so DMFW is no longer needed?

Last edited by sb01box; 08-31-2013 at 03:11 PM.
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 07:25 AM   #2
Certified Boxster Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,393
The 981 uses a dual mass flywheel for the manual transmission, not for PDK.
__________________
1999 996 C2 - sold - bought back - sold for more
1997 Spec Boxster BSR #254
1979 911 SC
POC Licensed DE/TT Instructor
thstone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 11:12 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by thstone View Post
The 981 uses a dual mass flywheel for the manual transmission, not for PDK.
my understanding is that PDK is computerized manual transmission. so it should have similar engine/transmission coupling. If PDK system does not need DMFW, and the crank is not forged, but built with the same technology as 986 or 987 (pre PDK), then what's the rationale for not needing DMFW
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 11:38 AM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern New jersey
Posts: 1,054
The clutch is completely different on the PDK, and there's 2 of them , so they would have to find a different solution than the DMF.
2009 Porsche Panamera Gets Techy With Dual-Clutch Gearbox, Active Aerodynamics - Motor Trend WOT
( the Panamera is the first pic. I found )
stephen wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 12:42 PM   #5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
where I'm going with this is to link PDK mechanical design to DMFW - LWFW discussion where using LWFW will disrupt (alter) the harmonics of the crank and result in breakage.
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 03:59 PM   #6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern New jersey
Posts: 1,054
You're trying to make a connection where there is none.
stephen wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2013, 06:05 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen wilson View Post
You're trying to make a connection where there is none.
I thought there's two features to DMFW.
1) decouples the trans from the engine when the clutch is fully engaged so as not to have two resonance beat on each other. didn't think that the difference in the clutch (wet or dry or "other") had any impact.
2) easier clutch engagement by not transferring the engine power pulse directly to the wheel.

my car has 137K miles, clutch is still good but it's getting there. so I am thinking about the LWFW path as an alternative to DMFW
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 05:17 AM   #8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern New jersey
Posts: 1,054
LWFW's have been discussed a ton here, some experts like JFP says it's a very bad idea, but others have run them for years with no issues. Do a search, read up, and make your decision. The PDK solution does not apply.
stephen wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 06:40 AM   #9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen wilson View Post
LWFW's have been discussed a ton here, some experts like JFP says it's a very bad idea, but others have run them for years with no issues. Do a search, read up, and make your decision. The PDK solution does not apply.
I am not trying to be argumentative. I have looked up DMFW and in Luk's web site, there is fair amount of engineering articles on DMFW.
my question is this. two different, but basically manual transmission. one, the clutch is controlled by the driver uses DMFW, the other is computer controlled.does not appear to have such resonance isolator.
the same fundamental engine and transmission resonances exists.
so WHY "the PDK solution does not apply"? just asking a technical question.
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 08:05 AM   #10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern New jersey
Posts: 1,054
The PDK does not have a traditional flywheel like the 986. From what I've read, the DMFW dampens crankshaft harmonics, like old V8's have a harmonic balancer on the front. I honestly don't know what they use to counter harmonics on the PDK, or the Tiptronic for that matter. You may want to add a dampened underdrive pulley in addition to the LWFW. I'll be the first to admit I don't have all the answers.

Last edited by stephen wilson; 09-02-2013 at 08:18 AM.
stephen wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 08:10 AM   #11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Depends on the day of the week....
Posts: 1,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb01box View Post
I am not trying to be argumentative. I have looked up DMFW and in Luk's web site, there is fair amount of engineering articles on DMFW.
my question is this. two different, but basically manual transmission. one, the clutch is controlled by the driver uses DMFW, the other is computer controlled.does not appear to have such resonance isolator.
the same fundamental engine and transmission resonances exists.
so WHY "the PDK solution does not apply"? just asking a technical question.
The DMFW is there to both dampen harmonics of the crank (the same way that many engines use a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley, while all but the M97 do not) AND to provide some "squish" from driveline shock getting transmitted to the crank (the alternative here being a sprung clutch friction disk).

The latter part of this is why the PDK cars do not need a DMFW. Due to the nature of being computer controlled (i.e. smooth, perfectly rev matched shifts EVERY time) and the fact that there are two clutches, one between the engine and gearbox/ one between the gearbox to the halfshafts, the "squish" factor is not needed.

Now, I'm not sure if the DFI motors are running a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley or not (haven't gotten to play with one of these yet), but I imagine they have to be damping harmonics somewhere.
__________________
Boxster S
Cloudsurfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 09:21 AM   #12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudsurfer View Post
The DMFW is there to both dampen harmonics of the crank (the same way that many engines use a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley, while all but the M97 do not) AND to provide some "squish" from driveline shock getting transmitted to the crank (the alternative here being a sprung clutch friction disk).

The latter part of this is why the PDK cars do not need a DMFW. Due to the nature of being computer controlled (i.e. smooth, perfectly rev matched shifts EVERY time) and the fact that there are two clutches, one between the engine and gearbox/ one between the gearbox to the halfshafts, the "squish" factor is not needed.

Now, I'm not sure if the DFI motors are running a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley or not (haven't gotten to play with one of these yet), but I imagine they have to be damping harmonics somewhere.
thanks - yes, my question is the same as your last sentence. "what mechanism, if any does the pdk equipped cars have for engine/trans harmonic dampening; aka DMFW?
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 09:47 AM   #13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Depends on the day of the week....
Posts: 1,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb01box View Post
thanks - yes, my question is the same as your last sentence. "what mechanism, if any does the pdk equipped cars have for engine/trans harmonic dampening; aka DMFW?
My guess is a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley.
__________________
Boxster S
Cloudsurfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 01:04 PM   #14
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,424
I'll post some pics from 4.2L "Cayman X" tomorrow. These will show you guys what the factory equipment looks like on the DFI engines.

I have a 2012 Cayman R apart now and can post some of those pics as well, then we have a 2014 GT3 inbound to take apart in November, too.
__________________
Jake Raby/www.flat6innovations.com
IMS Solution/ Faultless Tool Inventor
US Patent 8,992,089 &
US Patent 9,416,697
Developer of The IMS Retrofit Procedure- M96/ M97 Specialist
Jake Raby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 01:14 PM   #15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Raby View Post
I'll post some pics from 4.2L "Cayman X" tomorrow. These will show you guys what the factory equipment looks like on the DFI engines.

I have a 2012 Cayman R apart now and can post some of those pics as well, then we have a 2014 GT3 inbound to take apart in November, too.
thanks. that would be great. looking forward to tomorrow.
sb01box is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page