Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Healeys\]\s+rear\s+oil\s+seal\s+conversion\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Healeys\]\s+rear\s+oil\s+seal\s+conversion\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: Ralph Cap <rjcapo1@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 06:28:30 -0800 (PST); in the process of doing the conversion on a 3000 is it worth it to lighten the flywheel or even get a aluminum one _______________________________________________ Healeys@autox.team.net Donate: http:; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00058.html (6,790 bytes)
2. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: "PG" <britishcars@shaw.ca>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 07:24:47 -0800; Yes, it makes sense to lighten the flywheel. It will provide a more dynamic feeling to the engine...more throttle response. The downside is that the car will have less momentum when starting off. How; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00059.html (7,811 bytes)
3. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: Bob Spidell <bspidell@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:44:34 +0000 (UTC); Sounds like *speculation mode on* a lightened flywheel would be less desirable with a 3.54 rearend *speculation mode off* bs -- Bob Spidell - San Jose, CA Yes, it makes sense to lighten the flywheel.; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00060.html (7,923 bytes)
4. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: "Eric (Rick) Wilkins" <e-wilkins@cox.net>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:14:12 -0800; I'll play along. An Austin Healey isn't a drag racer, and the first gear with any of the rear ends these cars came with is a very short stump puller (IMNSHO) I have a 3.54:1 rear end with a 28% overd; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00063.html (7,941 bytes)
5. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: I Erbs <eyera3@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:49:49 -0800; Imho lighten the flywheel. Mine was done 35 yeas ago, along with balancing the rotating bits. Engine spills up just fine. the flywheel or even get a aluminum one http://autox.team.net/mailman/options; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00065.html (8,201 bytes)
6. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: Pieter and Linda <pieters@pt.lu>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 18:59:24 +0100; I have a 3.54 rear, 28% overdrive and a DW lightened and balanced flywheel. Take off and drivability is just fine and the engine is far more responsive. Wish I had done it years ago, cheers Pieter BJ; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00066.html (8,908 bytes)
7. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: "Mr. Bill" <bn1@pacbell.net>; Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 13:52:37 -0800; I disagree, Bob. While I do have a tweaked M Kit motor in my '53 BN1 3-speed, I've been running a 3.54 diff and a Bill Bolton 23# flywheel for at least six years. I have no problem starting out and t; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00072.html (9,092 bytes)
8. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: David Nock <healeydoc@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 14:37:50 -0800; I would strongly recommend installing a light flywheel. We installed lots of them and no one has ever had a problem. We are selling a new light weight flywheel that comes in at 15lbs. You will find t; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00073.html (9,050 bytes)
9. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: "Peter Schauss" <rpschauss@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 20:27:28 -0500; Just out of curiosity, why did they make the flywheel so heavy in the first Peter Schauss 1963 BJ7 1980 MGB _______________________________________________ Healeys@autox.team.net Donate: http://www.t; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00074.html (9,013 bytes)
10. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: WILLIAM B LAWRENCE <ynotink@msn.com>; Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 01:32:58 +0000; I have both on my BN1. Great combination... The heavy flywheel may tend to give a smoother start, but it also builds revs more gradually. The engine is more responsive to the throttle with a lighter; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00075.html (9,927 bytes)
11. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: I Erbs <eyera3@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 18:33:37 -0800; Came that way from the parts bin first http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/eyera3@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Healeys@autox.team.net Donate: http://www.team.ne; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00076.html (9,775 bytes)
12. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: Oudesluys <coudesluijs@chello.nl>; Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 10:29:51 +0100; To smooth out the vibrations of 3 bangs per revolution on 6-cyl engines. If you fit an overly light flywheel you may cause severe damage to the gears and some bearings in the transmission as these pu; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00079.html (8,254 bytes)
13. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: Chris Dimmock <austin.healey@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 00:31:42 +1100; Theory is fine. But there is over 50 years of practical experience here on this list!!! Ok. Here is mine.... Yes I have a lightened steel flywheel, and a rear engine seal. I also have triple 45 mm w; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00080.html (9,324 bytes)
14. Re: [Healeys] rear oil seal conversion (score: 1): Author: "Jonas Payne" <JPayne@ThorCon.net>; Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:56:25 -0800; Can't speak to Healeys, but TR's used an ungodly heavy flywheel (24-28 lbs) on their 1.9-2.1 L 4's. It was specifically utilized to smooth out the vibrations caused by the basic design of the engine; /html/healeys/2011-01/msg00084.html (9,136 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]