looked at my engine damper last nigh and saw that its starting to come apart. would i be better off o get a fluidampr of just put a sock one on?
also will the stock one of my 91.5 12v fit for the time being?

 

I would also like to know if the fluidamper is worth it or not..

 

I have one and I cant say I noticed any thing>If I was drag racing It would be worth it but on a mild mod truck stock is ok

 

Another benefit, no rubber to degrade.

 

we have them to quieten the new solid flywheel sb replacements in our 06's imo for your truck it is not cost effective

 

I can say I could hear a slight difference vs. the factory damper, but I personaly would buy the cheapest one of the two if replacing a failed one.

 

You have a DD clutch, it is worth it. It really helps quiet the vibes/rattle in direct at 1700 rpm. I've got them on both of my trucks, and it makes a good bit of difference.

 

I went back and forth on this one since my truck is only mildly bombed and my stocker had the rubber coming apart. I decided to get the fluidampr primarily for the hoped benefit of smoothing out low rpm loading (fuel efficiency) but also I like the idea of the rubber not going bad in another 300k miles which I intend to drive the truck.

Can't say I'm really all that impressed. My timing chip (ez) affected the low rpm performance much more (negatively) than the damper helped by a seat of the pants 5 to 1. It really doesn't seem to make that much difference compared to timing mods. In short the timing chip made the engine like low rpm loading a lot less, and the damper made it better by about 1/5 the difference.

Having said that, it does seem to allow noticeably smoother low rpm power delivery and is noticeably quieter. I never pop tested my injectors after putting tips on years ago, and had a slightly erratic idle. The idle smoothed out a bit after the damper. 80 rpm fluctuation dropped to about 25 rpm fluctuation.

I was getting pretty consistently 19.4mpg (stoked!) averaged in combined driving unloaded. Mostly highway, no freeway. I *think* the damper's smoothness has allowed me to garner 19.5 due to allowing more low rpm fueling. Such a small gain it could simply be driving or outside temps. But with no other changes, driving for fuel efficiency before and after I *have* registered a small bump in efficiency. My guess is without low rpm loading (driving style) this efficiency is lost though. So it in theory only facilitates the *possibility* of slightly better fuel efficiency and then only a very small bump.

Ultimately I'm happy with it. It is a better part that makes the engine run smoother, and doesn't have exposed rubber to get degraded by puke bottle oil.

Hope this helps the next guy looking at the fluidampr.

 

I don't think they advertise it as a fuel mileage or power increase. It simply cuts the torsional vibrations down.

 

Oh I should have clarified that. Torsional vibrations (or flex) become more of an "issue" at low rpm high load conditions if I understand right, so by that reasoning I was hoping it might facilitate higher load at lower rpm which theoretically should create the potential for slightly better fuel efficiency.

This was NOT based on any manufacturers claims.

Just sharing my take on it.