DTWTK: Dual mass flywheels vs solid flywheels

[DreamTheater]

So long story short my car which has a dual mass flywheel (DMF) needs to be replaced.

I'm thinking of going the lightened solid/standard flywheel route for the main two reasons
1.) Cheaper
2.) performance gain

The downside is that it may be
1.) louder especially at idle
2.) rougher gear changes or rougher in general

Does anyone have any experience with this? will the change from a dual mass to solid be much noisier & will it be worth it?

If I can find a DMF for around the same price I'll probably go with that over a solid flywheel.. I don't need the car to go fast.. The R1 does that for me

Cheers,
Graham

[MisterP]

If we are talking about a normal 4x4 or road car then the official reason that the DMF is used is to cushion the impact of the drive to the transmission and associated components (shock loading). Most Diffs, UJ's CV joints etc can take a hell of a beating, but put a large shock suddenly through them can cause teeth to sheer off, CV joints to shatter etc etc.
I guess its your choice if you weigh up the risks of 'damaging' your drivetrain components if you fit a solid flywheel and clutch setup.
Noiser..cant see what either one would be better/worse than the other....
Performance... negligible at best. Perhaps a few fractions of HP by reducing the reciprocating mass..but be careful of over lightening flywheels as this can make the drive worse by reducing the reciprocating weight and so the inertia of the engine and could mean having to rev the engine to get it to pull away without stalling.
Gearchanges harder?...I cant see why this would be the case?? Its the condition of the syncro hubs and syncros themselves etc that ensure that the gearchange is smooth by ensuring both shafts are turning at the same speeds. If your syncros or hubs are worn or your clutch is badly adjusted then no matter what you use it will be crunchy.
It will be a rougher drive than compared to a DMF system though. You dont have the damping effect of the DMF so bite and clutch take up will be more positive. Saying this though.. everything's relative. Millions of cars dont have DMF's and are perfectly drive-able.

For me it would come down to cost vs risk. As you say if you can find a DMF for the same price as a conversion..Id be tempted to go with the DMF if you havent had issues with the way it performs before.

Saying all the above however....if its a high performance or race car we are talking about...solid all the way.

Just my 10c

[DreamTheater]

Cool, thanks for the info!

I'll stick to a DMF in the car, it's a road car (bmw z4).. I'll probably be selling it in a year or so anyway and don't want any noises coming from the engine area as that'd be sure to raise eyebrows.

[optimal]

I have a few Transit vans that run a DMF & I have changed to a solid, with no problems for over 2years 50k+, also DMF's tend to create a lot of dust that clogs starter motors etc, so I'm told.