QuickTime RM-530 balance plate
02-29-2012, 04:33 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Burgaw, NC
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1992 TA convertible Jamaican yellow
Engine: 305 TPI...for a little while
Transmission: automatic...soon to be T56
Axle/Gears: 2.73...soon to be 3.42's
QuickTime RM-530 balance plate
Anyone try a QuickTime RM-530 balance plate for 305/350 one-piece RMS? I called their tech support and the tech said it had only been tested with the flex plates…but that does not make sense. Wouldn’t the weight have to be identical whether it was used with flexplate or flywheel?
Anyone know for sure?
Thanks!
Anyone know for sure?
Thanks!
02-29-2012, 05:00 PM
#2
Re: QuickTime RM-530 balance plate
You're right; the balance should be the same whether flywheel or flexplate.
What flywheel would you use to require a balance plate? Anything Gen I or II 86-up takes the same balance and shouldn't need a separate balance plate if you use a compatible flywheel.
My experience with one of those on a 400 SBC with T5 was
- the flywheel ring gear teeth weren't lined up with the starter teeth (no, the starter pinion extension action wasn't bad.)
- it adds depth to the flywheel / disc / pressure plate assembly which can play havoc with clutch apply and release.
- when that car got converted to T56, I mocked up a "neutral balance" flywheel with balance plate, had trouble with clutch release and ended up yanking them and finding a flywheel balanced for the 400.
Before you ask, yes you're talking about a one piece RMS and a 400 is two piece RMS and the problems with the balance plate I outlined apply to either.
In short, you don't have an engine that requires that piece, and the only flywheels that need it are aftermarket and non-stock in specification so don't find a reason to use a balance plate if you can avoid it.
What flywheel would you use to require a balance plate? Anything Gen I or II 86-up takes the same balance and shouldn't need a separate balance plate if you use a compatible flywheel.
My experience with one of those on a 400 SBC with T5 was
- the flywheel ring gear teeth weren't lined up with the starter teeth (no, the starter pinion extension action wasn't bad.)
- it adds depth to the flywheel / disc / pressure plate assembly which can play havoc with clutch apply and release.
- when that car got converted to T56, I mocked up a "neutral balance" flywheel with balance plate, had trouble with clutch release and ended up yanking them and finding a flywheel balanced for the 400.
Before you ask, yes you're talking about a one piece RMS and a 400 is two piece RMS and the problems with the balance plate I outlined apply to either.
In short, you don't have an engine that requires that piece, and the only flywheels that need it are aftermarket and non-stock in specification so don't find a reason to use a balance plate if you can avoid it.
02-29-2012, 05:57 PM
#3
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Burgaw, NC
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1992 TA convertible Jamaican yellow
Engine: 305 TPI...for a little while
Transmission: automatic...soon to be T56
Axle/Gears: 2.73...soon to be 3.42's
Re: QuickTime RM-530 balance plate
Hi Matthew....still looking a way to get the LS/T56 behind my 305! I just came across this balance plate today and wondering if anyone has tried it. It would allow me to just use the LS set-up without having to locate a 305 flywheel. I don't have the luxury of a lot of time, so I need to have everything lined up before I start the change-over and I'd like to know what options there might be.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
monte87cortez
Transmissions and Drivetrain
2
09-26-2015 08:10 PM
roysatikas
Transmissions and Drivetrain
0
09-22-2015 08:15 PM
