Just wondering what is the benefits of converting from a dual mass flywheel to a solidly flywheel and also what the price range would be. I have a 09 plate 1.9tdie and can get a conversion kit for roughly £350. Any advice would be brilliant thanks!
Flywheel conversion
- Thread starter Owen
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 10,887
- Reaction score
- 4,888
- Points
- 113
It's maybe easier to ask what the benefits of keeping a DMF setup are.
On a petrol engine,the extra vibration and harshness at idle with an SMF are noticeable for sure,and DMF's first appeared on diesel engined cars to reduce the knobbly feel of a diesel at idle by damping vibrations.
You'll certainly notice that.
Benefits of removing the DMF.....you obviously remove the consequences of a DMF failure,which is possible,but very unlikely.
On a petrol engine,the extra vibration and harshness at idle with an SMF are noticeable for sure,and DMF's first appeared on diesel engined cars to reduce the knobbly feel of a diesel at idle by damping vibrations.
You'll certainly notice that.
Benefits of removing the DMF.....you obviously remove the consequences of a DMF failure,which is possible,but very unlikely.
Okay thanks, only reason I'm thinking of getting a SMF is because my DMF is really noise the now and wanted the piece of mind of not having to worry about getting a DMF then it becoming noisy again in the future.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 10,887
- Reaction score
- 4,888
- Points
- 113
If the DMF is getting noisy or rattly it should be replaced,but the question you have then is how rattly the SMF will be.
Failure of an SMF is extremely unlikely,so you have that plus side,but I can give you the example of my (petrol engined) car which is pretty knobbly at idle.
A diesel will be worse......some of the diesel guys will no doubt give you more advice.
Spoke to a few guys in my work, (I'm a light vehicle technician/mechanic) for their opinions and they all said due to the mileage I do (easy 14,000 miles a year) and also because I have the car on finance (woops), that I should just get the SMF because it will only be a slight change in the feeling of the engine.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 10,887
- Reaction score
- 4,888
- Points
- 113
As I said,the choice is yours,knowing what the pros and cons are,and as long as you're happy with that,all should be fine.
Both solutions work,they're just 2 different ways of achieving the same end.
Both solutions work,they're just 2 different ways of achieving the same end.
It depends what your intentions for the car are. If it's going to be a work horse you don't care about, nor about the way it drives then go for SMF. Do expect extra vibration as explained by @S3Alex and again he's right...you can notice on a petrol engine and definitely notice on a diesel.
The DMF is all about smoothing out the gear changes and the 'set off' of the car, and more importantly protecting the input side of the gearbox from all those vibrations.
If you want to keep the car nice and OEM and keep it driving nice, I'd definitely stick with DMF. Unless they are totally abused DMFs easily last 100,000 miles and no offence mate but with that 1.9 engine you aren't exactly throwing 500ft lb of torque through it.
To give you a balanced point of view, I will say that I am against the principle of SMF conversions in general, never did it on my Corolla and haven't on the Audi. Some things are there to be messed around with, and some things just aren't.
There will be plenty of people, however, who have done the SMF conversion and love it. There are also those who have had no detrimental effect on any other component of their car...my only argument to those is if Audi put a DMF in it, keep it that way lol.
One thing I will say - drive one that has had the SMF conversion done. Don't go on the hear-say of mechanics, they will have you seeing flying pigs before you know it.
Also if you do go SMF, get a good quality conversion kit like a LUK, don't go for something like National...whoever the hell makes those hehe.
The DMF is all about smoothing out the gear changes and the 'set off' of the car, and more importantly protecting the input side of the gearbox from all those vibrations.
If you want to keep the car nice and OEM and keep it driving nice, I'd definitely stick with DMF. Unless they are totally abused DMFs easily last 100,000 miles and no offence mate but with that 1.9 engine you aren't exactly throwing 500ft lb of torque through it.
To give you a balanced point of view, I will say that I am against the principle of SMF conversions in general, never did it on my Corolla and haven't on the Audi. Some things are there to be messed around with, and some things just aren't.
There will be plenty of people, however, who have done the SMF conversion and love it. There are also those who have had no detrimental effect on any other component of their car...my only argument to those is if Audi put a DMF in it, keep it that way lol.
One thing I will say - drive one that has had the SMF conversion done. Don't go on the hear-say of mechanics, they will have you seeing flying pigs before you know it.
Also if you do go SMF, get a good quality conversion kit like a LUK, don't go for something like National...whoever the hell makes those hehe.
Most of the people which I know who had their DMF failure switched to SMF and are perfectly happy. SMF lasts a lot longer, you can trash car more without a chance of it failing compared to DMF.
I still have DMF on my car and will surely go SMF way if my DMF fails one day.
I still have DMF on my car and will surely go SMF way if my DMF fails one day.
