Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 109

Thread: 6.2/6.5 Fluidampr?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    11,382

    Thumbs up 6.2/6.5 Fluidampr?

    Good news! Had a discussion with the folks from Fluidamper while at SEMA. They are said to be developing a damper for the 6.2/6.5...

    Cost will be $400-450, but will be a one-time purchase. They don't wear out or deteriorate over time like the rubber elastomer OE versions. I'll post more once the info is assembled...

    Jim

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Palm Beach, Florida
    Posts
    1,816

    Default You made my day

    I'll be doing the t-chain sometime in near future so this is good news to me!
    99 GMC SUB, 2500, 4x4, 6.5 TD (F) #H32 enhanced blk, Phaser timing set, B&D IC, 3" ATS exh, K&N w/prefilter, 4WD NVG 246, 4L80E kevlar Transgo off road/tow mods/B&M supercooler, 14 FF MagTec w/locker 3.42:1, 9.25" IFS frt/diff 3.42:1 w/ARB locker, AutoMeter Boost & pre-turbo pyro meter, 12,000 lb hydro winch, Warn classic bumper w/brushguard & diesel scoop, Max E-torq Stage 3, hi pop inj, oil bypass sys, on board air comp for front ARB locker & tire inflation, DynaView driving/auto-cornering lts, DZ nerfs, A/T 285/75/16 SilentArmor 3750 lb rated on 3750 lb rated Alcoa, 3 IP drivers 2 r spares.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Louisville Kentucky
    Posts
    85

    Default

    I thought it was already out and available. is it?
    1994 chevy turbo diesel 3500 4WD extended cab.
    4 inch Pinnacle exhaust from the turbo back
    Kennedy OPS harness (yet to be installed)
    FSD cooler (yet to be installed, planning on placing in fender to pick up air from intake)
    Bet top extendable mirrors.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Lubbock TX, USA
    Posts
    4,194

    Default

    I've seen the "prototype" plastic mock-up version. Still some bugs to work out, but they're definitly making one.

    J

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    South Central Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    2,697

    Default

    If you check on their website under "Duramax" there has been a part number listed for the 6.5 as well - http://www.fluidampr.com/DURAMAX.htm
    Attached Images Attached Images
    '94 GMC 6.5TD K1500 4L80E 2-Door Yukon SLE 221K
    '93 Chevrolet 6.5TD K2500HD NV4500 Std. Cab Longbed 187K
    '85 Toyota 22R RN60 4x4 Std. Cab Shortbed 178K (Currently retired for rebuild)
    Diesel Page Member #2423

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    11,382

    Arrow

    According to the seemingly knowledgeable fellow I spoke with in LV, the 6.5 damper isn't quite ready for prime time, but is close.

    I was interested in their findings that the performance crowd routinely sees elastomer OE type damper failures on competition engines. Seems the increased stresses exact a toll on OE dampers, but the Fluidamper is unaffected on those same engines. Is it worth the asking price for use on a daily driver?

    Jim

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    11,382

    Arrow FD Update

    The 6.5L Fluidamper is now available. As mentioned earlier in this thread, I spent some time with the FD folks while at the SEMA show last fall. As a followup, I contacted them recently to learn how things were progressing.

    In a phone conversation with Dan Oddy (lead design engineer for the 6.5L damper), I learned that the 6.5L damper was a unique design, and was not based on another of their product line. The external balance and other features are unique. While he didn’t go into too much detail, I was told that there are a series of equations that FD uses to define the mechanical properties of any fluid damper, and their FD damper used on the 6.5L is no exception. They measure factors like crankshaft weight & inertia and others to help solve the equation. Obviously, using a damper designed for another engine wouldn’t work, due to all of the various factors not matching.

    Dan mentioned that he was well aware of the problem some owners have had regarding the 6.5L cast iron crankshaft, and he said their damper should reduce the breakage.

    I was told that on a stock 6.5L application, we should be able to measure approximately 5% additional horsepower and torque – when using their fluid damper. This is so because the many and varied orders of harmonics present in a crankshaft during operation are more effectively dealt with in an FD damper, where a rubber isolated damper only helps control harmonics over a more narrow range. Harmonics can counter the force applied by a particular rod and piston while in operation. Reduce or eliminate those harmonics, and you get a small bump in hp/tq.

    I was also told that Jamie Avant of The Diesel Depot in Georgia and John Ayre of Dyna Droit diesel are evaluating production samples.

    Jim Bigley

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    COLORADO
    Posts
    723

    Default

    I've heard both good and bad about the FD. John @ dyna droit swears that on his Dmax it idles smoother and helps quiet the engine down. I've never talked to anyone that actually has installed the FD on a 6.5 though.
    white '93 K2500 started it all..
    red '94 K3500 old faithful
    black '93 K3500 daily driver
    '83 G20 conversion van
    '74 C65 truck diesel conversion...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Posts
    11

    Default

    [QUOTE=More Power]
    [FONT=Verdana]I was told that on a stock 6.5L application, we should be able to measure approximately 5% additional horsepower and torque

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Lubbock TX, USA
    Posts
    4,194

    Default

    Lemme get this straight...

    6.2L application? Does this come with a spacer for the crank because the 6.5 balancer typically has the shorter shank because of the reluctor wheel?

    Curious as always, If it's truely smooth, this would be great for the 6.2.

    J

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Riverside, CA USA
    Posts
    686

    Default

    I am with the previous poster. Stating 5% is nice, but provide some test data. If it took that much engineering to design the damper, you would surely test an engine or two before and after the installation. Testimonials are nice, but hard data is better!
    83 C10 Suburban, Silverado, 6.2, 700R4, 3.73, 31-10.50R15
    82 C30 Crew Cab dually, 6.2, Banks, Th400, 4.10, Gear Vendors, 235-85R16
    83 C20 Suburban, Sierra Classic, 6.2, 700R4, 4.10, custom paint, 285-50R20
    95 Yukon, 6.5, 4L80E, 3.42, 265-50R20
    73 GMC Astro 95, 8V71, 10 speed Roadranger, 110" WB, 6 each 11R24.5

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,573

    Arrow

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig M
    I am with the previous poster. Stating 5% is nice, but provide some test data. If it took that much engineering to design the damper, you would surely test an engine or two before and after the installation. Testimonials are nice, but hard data is better!
    I don't think HP/TQ testing is worth the cost and time. Dyno plots are subjective, anyway. Any power gains to be had will be a bonus, if even realized. The focus of the design is functionality. If a power gain is there, consider it a perk. It doesn't appear they are using it as a selling point. A 5% gain is not going to justify the cost of this product, but it does indicate a balanced engine operates more efficiently, which is not news. I seriously doubt anyone will demand a refund because they didn't get their 5%, which was never promised in the first place.
    1985 Blazer 6.2
    2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
    dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Riverside, CA USA
    Posts
    686

    Default

    Jims post was that Dan Oddy of Fluiddamper made the 5% statement. For Dan to make that public statement, to a know diesel admistrator, to me means he should have some data to back it up. Dan mentioned in his testimonial post that he is going to get some data. Dan brough it up, now its time for him to show it. 5% is not much, but that and a smother engine might sell a few of them.
    83 C10 Suburban, Silverado, 6.2, 700R4, 3.73, 31-10.50R15
    82 C30 Crew Cab dually, 6.2, Banks, Th400, 4.10, Gear Vendors, 235-85R16
    83 C20 Suburban, Sierra Classic, 6.2, 700R4, 4.10, custom paint, 285-50R20
    95 Yukon, 6.5, 4L80E, 3.42, 265-50R20
    73 GMC Astro 95, 8V71, 10 speed Roadranger, 110" WB, 6 each 11R24.5

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    11,382

    Default

    Craig, Actually, IIRC my conversation with Dan went something like this:

    Jim to Dan: I remember seeing some FD information while at SEMA that mentioned a small increase in power after installing the FD.

    Dan to Jim: Yes, on a stock diesel, we typically see on the order of a 5% increase. That percentage can change, depending on how modified the engine might be.


    The power increase discussion was a very minor point in our conversation. I am primarily concerned with whether the FD can reduce the crank failures we hear about. I know from reading a lot about crankshaft harmonics that if a product can reduce the amplitude of those harmonics, it should be a good thing. That's my main interest. If we also see a small bump in power, as DmaxMaverick mentioned, that's just a bonus - not a major selling point. There are less expensive ways to get 5% more power.

    But, as mentioned earlier, we/someone will try to verify the power gain. If I'm involved, it will be as thorough and fair a test as I can think of, and I'll report exactly how the test was performed and whether there was a change in power.

    Jim

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john8662
    Lemme get this straight...

    6.2L application? Does this come with a spacer for the crank because the 6.5 balancer typically has the shorter shank because of the reluctor wheel?

    Curious as always, If it's truely smooth, this would be great for the 6.2.

    J
    Yes the 6.2L application (p/n 800191) does come with the spacer to make up for the shorter hub length because of the reluctor wheel on the newer engines. if you do not need the spacer the p/n is 800141.

    The design intent of all Fluidamprs is to reduce torsional vibration from the crankshaft to increase the life of your engine & internal components. Any power gain is purely a bonus as it has been stated. In general we see a 5% gain in power, this is because we are properly controlling crankshaft vibration which allows the engine to run more efficiently.

    We have seen some applications have basically no power gain & in some we have seen a 10% gain. It just depends how effective the stock rubber damper is when it was originally designed. If the OEM did a good job designing the rubber damper there is only so much more left on the table that our damper will be able to pick up. If the OEM did a poor job in designing the stock damper there is much more our damper can gain. Since we entered the perofrmance diesel market we have noticed that the stock dampers were not designed well & in many cases are overworked. Rubber dampers are limited in how much vibration they can absorb. A fluid type damper can absorb much more vibration due to the silicone fluid that is used.

    Right now I do not have any data that I can post on the forum however I am working with Jim & will be contacting him later to possibly set up an independent test so that we can post hp & torque data with our Fluidampr for those who would like to know.

    I apologize for any confusion I may have caused about the 5% power gain statement as this was meant to be a general statement. if any one has any other questions I would be happy to try & help.

    Thanks,
    Dan
    Dan Oddy
    Sales Engineer
    Fluidampr / Vibratech TVD

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Albans, WV
    Posts
    368

    Default

    Interesting, but OUCH! $470!
    I don't think it's worth putting one on my 260k mile engine, but maybe if I build one someday I'll consider it.

    I have a chassis dyno, so if I ever put one on, I could probably tell if it made a difference.
    96 Suburban K2500 6.5L TD. High miles and daily driven (for now). Remote mount FSD with cooler, Turbo Master/Boost fooler, 4" Jardine turbo back exhaust, 2.5" cross-over pipe, Boost, EGT, & Tranny temp gauges, working on more.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Lubbock TX, USA
    Posts
    4,194

    Default

    Thanks Dan!

    Now I can properly recycle my old 6.2L balancers! I had in the back of my mind to keep them just in case I need to cut off the hub to adapt to 6.2L.

    J
    1982 C10 SCSWB 6.5TD, mods too extensive to list. (13.69 1/4 mile @94.6 MPH) RACE TRUCK
    1982 C10 SCSWB 6.2NA, 2.73 700
    1986 C10 SCLWB 6.2TD 3.73 700
    1989 V20 SUB 6.2NA, 3.73 400
    1994 G20 VAN 6.5NA, 3.42 60E
    1994 K20LD ECSWB 6.5TD, 3.42 80E
    1995 K20 SUB 6.5TD, Wrecked, ran into by stupid teen.
    1995 C3500HD DRW 6.5TD, 12' Flatbed 5.13 80E
    1995 C3500HD DRW 6.5TD, 18' Rollback Wrecker 4.63 80E
    1994 C20HD ECLWB 6.5TD 3.73 80E Wifes Truck.
    1995 C20LD ECSWB 6.5TD 3.73 80E
    1995 K20LD SCLWB 6.5TD 3.73 80E
    1996 K30 DRW 6.5TD 4.10 80E
    1997 C10 Tahoe 2Door 2WD 5.7L to 6.5 Conversion Underway

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    132

    Default

    Yea the FD is a nice product. When I got mine I was impressed on how nice the fd really came out. Right now it is just sitting around collecting dust Since I have no need for it at this time .
    95 suburban 2500 4x4
    6bt
    47 re
    373
    under construction

    6.5 parts for sale
    http://home.dejazzd.com/jkauto/6.5%20PARTS%20PAGE.htm

    MY SUBURBAN INFO HERE

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    2,646

    Default

    How about a front and rear pic of that bad boy, directly into the hub, for show'n'tell?

    Maybe even include the oem hb?
    jd
    '96 Dodge 3500HD cc 2wd drw............'89 GMC 3500 cc 4wd drw
    5.9 12v #10TST 6sp SBC13-1.375.......6.5TD EFI maxEtorq v2.0 DSG
    DODGE makes it CUMMINS shakes it.....4L80E 205 4.10 Dana60\70HD
    6 in a row makes it go.......................Grandpa's big truck

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    129

    Default

    I want one regardless.

    Fluidampr makes a nice product.

    With or Without 5%...

    I have had only good luck with them in 20+ years.

    Have never been down the track in my BBC without one.

    Even have contingency check stubs to prove...
    Billy
    '97 CC Dually INTERCOOLED 6.5 - Sold
    '06 Extended Cab/Long Bed LBZ

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •