legacycentral bbs

Should I do it on a motor that has over 170k miles on it? I have no idea if it has ever been replaced on this car. I imagine the clutch has been but I have no way of knowing if the flywheel has or not. With it not being the stock motor I have no idea if it's the correct flywheel anyways, it does however seem to be working currently.

There's a local machine shop that will do it for $41 and the cheapest new flywheel I can find is around $50 w/out shipping.

I don't really have the $ for a new part but I don't really have the $ to resurface the damn thing either.

What are the reasons to not resurface it?

Did I miss any info?

Do you have the money to redo the whole job and replace the flywheel anyway possibly not too far down the road? Just replace it. Or take it in and have them tell you if its still within spec and good enough shape to resurface.

Having the $ all depends on how quickly I can get back to work. Keeping working has been very difficult the past 2 years, too many lay offs while working for a contracting company.

If I had the $ then I'd just buy a new one and say F the old one.

Replacing the clutch and NOT do the flywheel= Its like putting on new pads but not touching the rotors.
If the car has high miles, better off to suck up the extra bucks and get a new one.

The maroon car I have-i picked up from a friend before he shipped out. He did the clutch and not the flywheel. It was below spec at this point, and the clutch almost would not engage. It cost me a bit more to have to pull the engine and put on a new one, when if he had taken the time, -I would not have had to do it.

Do it right the first time, or pay to do it twice.

As I mentioned in another thread, I don't really care to resurface flywheels, but I know its done all the time, so you'd have to check the condition of the existing flywheel and see.

I just did it on my metro with good results. It depends on how worn your existing flywheel is.

I've done it both ways resurfaced and not and had good results both times. But if you do get it resurfaced I know the N/A flywheels have a small step on them, a lot of places will cut them flat.

rallyak wrote:I've done it both ways resurfaced and not and had good results both times. But if you do get it resurfaced I know the N/A flywheels have a small step on them, a lot of places will cut them flat.

Small step? All the pics I've seen of the new flywheels look like a large mostly flat piece of metal.

here's a pic of stock flywheel off my wife's car.

It raised in the middle im not sure exactly how much,but if I had to guess I would say around .030 step.

Would the raised area be covered by the clutch disk or does it extend past the disk?

Is it a bad thing to have it shaved off?

It's raised right where the clutch disk contacts it, So the clutch would clamp down a little tighter.

I would have the step put back on if it get resurfaced.

Is the .030 a visible difference?

This isn't the original motor and I have no idea what year this motor is or what was done to it to put it in. Meaning flywheel & clutch replaced or not.

Yes it's visible, it's almost half as much as the gap on the spark plugs.

What should I do if this flywheel doesn't have it?

I've used them without the step but the clutch didn't seam to last as long. If you don't resurface I would take 80 grit paper to to surface and take the glaze off like I did in the pic I posted.

If you have it resurfaced make sure they put the step on it. I think the factory put it there for a reason.

Thanks for the tip rallyak. With all the reading I've done lately nobody has said anything about the step on the surface.

Any idea if that was for a certain year range or for all of them?

Not sure but both of mine 90 and 92 both had the oem flywheel in them and both had the step.

Looks like it's time to backtrack my motor if possible.