|
one person's 'luck' is another's 'caluclated risk'. folks have been taught to want black or white - it breaks or it doesn't. as soon as you get into 'it may break' you get conflict. people try to turn the grey into black or white. it 'may' break' turns into it 'won't' break or it 'will' break, and folks argue. 'i'm right' 'no i'm right'. you're both right. your both wrong. there are some that have broken, and some that have not. make a choice. try to base it on fact. ie, how may lw fw have broken vs how many are is use? ditto ims. ditto whatever. make your call based on risk vs reward - will a lw fw potentially fail sooner than a dual mass? perhaps. will it make driving more fun in the interim? perhaps. can you afford to deal with a failure if it happens? perhaps. ball it all up, make a decision and move on. all the feedback you get on the internet? worth what you paid for it. one failed flywheel with a sensational photo can morph into 'all lw flywheels fail' quite quickly out here in the ether. or a couple of success stories can send it the other direction (less frequently, however, as the interweb tends to attract the negative).
my personal story? i called the guys that made the dampened udps for gt3s and asked about an m96 application for use with lw fws and they told me that there was absolutely no need. i mean, is the oem flywheel dual mass in order to dampen harmonics, or is it heavier in order to allow use of a lighter unsprung clutch? it is a hairdressers car after all ...
|
Threaded Mode
