On 03/07/2019 11:23, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jul 2019 10:02:31 +0100, NY wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message
tairs...
With the first Octavia, I was planning to get the DMF changed to a
proper flywheel (Skoda do one for taxis), but other things went wrong,
so I traded it in. We still have the newer one and at just over 100k
miles, the "feature" is there, but liveable with.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of a dual mass flywheel?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-mass_flywheel seems to imply that
with a high-torque-at-low-revs engine (a diesel) a DMF is highly
desirable to absorb some of the peaks in the torque as each cylinder
fires. Is the disadvantage mainly that it is more complex and therefore
more costly?

I think the idea is it acts like a light weight for when the velocity of
the flywheel needs to change quickly, but a heavy weight when it's needed
to keep the engine stable.

No. It doesn't and thats not the idea.

It acts *like* a heavy flywheel in terms of smoothing out torque pulses
but it is in fact lighter.


There are springs and weights involved which
are slotted into a recess in the flywheel. I'm guessing there are metal
fatigue issues around having to much around with the single casting of
the flywheel.

I wonder if a system with two flywheels might be better ?

It *is* a system with two flywheels


--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.