fluid damper good or bad

S

sprowzms

New member
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
25
i have a 06 lbz with a broken crankshaft. i bought a fliud damper thinking it would hopefully help prevent this from happing again. after i bought this i was told that the fluid style was a bad choice. just interested in some opinions thanks
 
From what I have heard and read, the fluidamper seems to be great for stock engines but to heavy for modded engines that turn up higher in the RPM range. I know somebody who broke 2 cranks with one, swapped out to an ATI and has been going for over a year now with it.
 
Seems the ATI/SoCal is more popular but no personal experience here. I'll buy an ATI when the time comes.
 
I've been using them for 25 years on gasser engines without an issue (and still have the original 25-year-old one). That said, they are definitely heavier than alternatives (ATI/Socal), but some of those alternatives also require being sent to the factory for rebuilding after a limited number of years.

For my new LBZ build I am using the ATI/Socal damper.
 
Been using Fluidamper for years zero problem, on motors that turn well over 10,000 rpms the ATI one is good as well, but I see the real problem is the massive counter weight off the front of the crank. I advise spending the $800 to $1000 to internal balance them.
Or use a new billet from one of the crank shops that is built as an internal unit. Take weight off the crank is also an answer .
 
I have ran both on my truck. The ATI first and now the Fluiddampner. Ati explained it to me that the reason the fluiddampner has to have the roll pins to keep it from fretting is because it simply cannot keep up with the high rpm's. The weight in the fluid can't react that fast causing it to get slammed around out of balance. Fluid dampers are meant for big heavy slow turning diesel like gen sets and other stock applications that come factory with them on.
So I bought the Ati the first time cause it made sense to me. I had zero issues with it except that I wanted to put a tach in my truck and you can't use the four mounting bolts for the pickups like the FD

Now when we did the new motor, I wanted the ease of a tach pickup and it's hard to argue the amount of fluid dampers out there like big bad dodge and the Scheid trucks and many other badass machines. So I bought one and currantly running it. I have had no issues yet but we will see at the end of the season.

Operation wise I can't tell a differance really so take that for what it's worth.
 
Used on on my cummins since day one no problems. I am using a socal on the Duramax because we are internaly balancing the engine, fluid damper does not offer a damper of zero balance.

Malcolm
 
24VChevy said:
Used on on my cummins since day one no problems. I am using a socal on the Duramax because we are internaly balancing the engine, fluid damper does not offer a damper of zero balance.

Malcolm
Click to expand...

I'm surprised they didn't make the counterweight "bolt-in" like they did on the big block Chevy ones. At least the newer ones! My 25-year-old one has the counterweight "built-in", but I have seen newer ones that have it removable.
 
I know a bunch of people (including me) that run the ATI, some people say fluid is fine, many say that it is bad for the Dmax builds
 
ive used fluidampr on alot of cars ive owned but have no experience with them on diesels. yet :) i have nothing but good things to say about them though.
 
Michael said:
I've been using them for 25 years on gasser engines without an issue (and still have the original 25-year-old one). That said, they are definitely heavier than alternatives (ATI/Socal), but some of those alternatives also require being sent to the factory for rebuilding after a limited number of years.

For my new LBZ build I am using the ATI/Socal damper.
Click to expand...

Like stated after your statement, they are good for those applications because they are internally balanced engines. The duramax being an externally balanced needs the ATI style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top