Performance and Accessories 2nd gen only Talk about Dodge/Cummins aftermarket products for second generation trucks here. Can include high-performance mods, or general accessories.

Fluidamper

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:45 AM
  #1  
Southern Pride's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
From: Beaumont, Tx
Fluidamper

do those fluidamper dampers really work, and are they really worth putting on your truck if your not bombing the heck out of it, and does anyone here have one? have yall gained any fuel mileage from using it? are they worth the money for what the stated claims are? just curious.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 10:29 AM
  #2  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
I say if your not going stupid on power and drag racing or sled pulling and turning high rpm's then I wouldn't worry about it. It can only help but I'd have a hard time justifying that kinda money for a difference that I'm not noticing. I'm sure some will come on here and tell you that your doing your engine a favor by getting rid of harmful vibrations and it'll last longer but cummins designed these engines with the factory dampner in mind and they last 500k+ so I really don't see a need for it unless your using your motor above and beyond it's limits.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 11:58 AM
  #3  
RowJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,234
Likes: 1
From: Texas/Oklahoma Border
I researched this topic 2 yrs ago and found unless your building a truck to go over 4000 rpm it's not worth doing.... no added benefit!

RJ
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 02:19 PM
  #4  
XLR8R's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,785
Likes: 3
From: Pattonville, Texas
I agree with what Tyler and Rowland posted, with the qualification that if you've installed an aftermarket clutch in front of a G56 with the dual/mass flywheel, the FluidDamper is much more beneficial due to it's cancellation of the CTD's notorious harmonics/vibration, which can otherwise shorten the lifespan of the G56's internals.

Of course, Peter has recently announced the new dual-mass SB clutch just for the G56!

p.s. and yes, I realize this is the 2nd gen forum - never know who might be reading it!
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 02:24 PM
  #5  
99globalwarmer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 674
Likes: 2
From: 707 california
rowjand big blue are right its not really needed but if your stock dampener is really haggard like mine was then go ahead if you feel comfortable loosing the money for no real power. but the engine does feel a bit smoother and not as pingy if thats the right word to use.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 07:55 PM
  #6  
Jetpilot's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
From: Hershey, PA
Originally Posted by BigBlue
cummins designed these engines with the factory dampner in mind and they last 500k+ so I really don't see a need for it unless your using your motor above and beyond it's limits.
Well lets see..... In the 24v arena that would be anything over 235 or 245 (HO) crank HP. When we add more fuel, different boost, egt, rpm, torque, HP, etc the original cummins design is kinda out the window. Is a Fluidampr necessary, well probably not for the average Joe but nobody has really done a long term scientific study to prove or disprove it either way. I can tell you it will quieten a DD clutch a bunch and to do this it must be doing something. But if HP gains are what you are looking for a Fluidampr won't make a hill of beans different.

Just food for thought.

Doug
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 12:10 AM
  #7  
Ph4tty's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,465
Likes: 0
From: fredericksburg, virginia
Originally Posted by RowJ
I researched this topic 2 yrs ago and found unless your building a truck to go over 4000 rpm it's not worth doing.... no added benefit!

RJ
You wouldn't expect to see less wear if the cummins is vibrating less?

Originally Posted by Jetpilot
Well lets see..... In the 24v arena that would be anything over 235 or 245 (HO) crank HP. When we add more fuel, different boost, egt, rpm, torque, HP, etc the original cummins design is kinda out the window. Is a Fluidampr necessary, well probably not for the average Joe but nobody has really done a long term scientific study to prove or disprove it either way. I can tell you it will quieten a DD clutch a bunch and to do this it must be doing something. But if HP gains are what you are looking for a Fluidampr won't make a hill of beans different.

Just food for thought.

Doug
Good points Doug. I can't say the fluidamper made much of a difference in clutch noise, but it made a significant decrease in the humming noise my nv5600 started making after getting an unsprung dual disk clutch.
Reply

Trending Topics

Old May 3, 2007 | 12:40 AM
  #8  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
While I agree doug that cummins designed it for 245hp and that double or tripling the power is above and beyond what they designed it for, how many people have trashed a motor from using the stock damper at those power levels? Guess it's hard to prove though. Guess we need two 600+hp engines, one with a stock damper and the other with a fluidampr, and two engine dynos. Any donations?
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 06:47 AM
  #9  
Jetpilot's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
From: Hershey, PA
Tyler,

Actually I think what we need would be several trucks setup exactly the same and driven for a long time. Then tear them down and inspect wear. Heck we could even try the same test on two stock engines. We need to remember Cummins designed these engines but cost was part of the design. Every penny they can save impacts their bottom line..... I am not saying the OEM dampr is junk, just that with all components there might be a better option out there.

Doug
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 06:56 AM
  #10  
2141pete's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
From: Camp Pendleton, CA
I know they definetley seem to make them run a bit smoother.
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 07:36 AM
  #11  
Tiger Rag's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
From: W-S, NC
Mine seems to run smoother now, but I also just had headwork/springs, lower compression, etc done. Could probably be attributed to the headwork, but Peter at SBC said it would be a good idea when I got the DD and I just thought it might help driveline noise in general. Nothing too major to report, but definitely better overall.
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 07:50 AM
  #12  
Southern Pride's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
From: Beaumont, Tx
Thanks for all the replys guys. i didnt know to much about this one, but i guess it boils down to if you want to drop the $300+ bucks on one go ahead and do it. semper
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 07:55 AM
  #13  
2141pete's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
From: Camp Pendleton, CA
I know johnp's revs smoother than a small block chevy but I dont think it's just the fluid damper HAHAHA
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 08:25 AM
  #14  
Tiger Rag's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
From: W-S, NC
Originally Posted by Southern Pride
Thanks for all the replys guys. i didnt know to much about this one, but i guess it boils down to if you want to drop the $300+ bucks on one go ahead and do it. semper
I don't think you'll find one less than $400. Good luck though, you never know.
Reply
Old May 3, 2007 | 08:31 AM
  #15  
Jetpilot's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
From: Hershey, PA
Originally Posted by Tiger Rag
I don't think you'll find one less than $400. Good luck though, you never know.
You are correct..... Fluidampr hold all its authorized dealers to standardized pricing.

Doug
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:48 AM.