When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
__________________ Stuart Dickinson Managing Director Velocity Automotive Performance Limited 206 Maple Avenue Oliver, BC Canada V2A 4W6 Office: (1)250-485-5126 www.velocityap.com
Here you go buddy. Chug a few of these, should fix the problem.
__________________ Stuart Dickinson Managing Director Velocity Automotive Performance Limited 206 Maple Avenue Oliver, BC Canada V2A 4W6 Office: (1)250-485-5126 www.velocityap.com
I think the process you are taking is correct, it might have been lost in my last post, but the route to curing your problem with current fitted hardware is / was simple... remap ECU with:
1-increase the gear chatter retard algorithm
2- to help a little more nudge the idle speed up.
3-help anti stall algorithms with recalibration to catch a faster to decelerate flywheel
hey presto a seamlessly integrated upgrade. Those steps are desktop calibration and laptop connect to flash the ECU so real, real easy?
We fitted another AMR clutch today. The flywheel is same weight as OEM part, the clutch has same friction discs as V12V but thinner cooling vein. In reality I can’t see the thinner cooling vein having much of an impact and I’d say essentially the performance and durability of AMR clutch will be same as stock V12V kit.
Bamford Rose take a std V12V clutch and strips and re machines basket and internals to return a wider pedal modulation window making pull away more controllable and is essentially the reason why our kit will work on ASM and the factory kit is manual only.
I’m sure the factory wanted a light weight flywheel for the AMR kit to allow engine responsiveness as sharp as our kit, but that would mean the re calibration measures i discuss. Whilst the world of aftermarket can do that (if they have the know how of course) the factory could not because an amended ECU program would be against in market homologation, hence AMR kit is same weight flywheel with std mapping and im sure you will not, or should not, have the issues you report now.
You will enjoy the AMR kit, everyone we have fitted the kit for is happy with it. The Bamford Rose kit offers a bit more improvement but like any aftermarket kit in the box, it requires in territory support for the 1 in 10 problem car which is the reason I’m reluctant to simply dispatch the kit in a box, but then again, V12V clutches shipped in a box isn’t something to worry about anymore on account unregulated OEM parts supply in US is all but switched off?
In a nutshell, yes, they want it returned to stock because the software update they have that I believe remaps fuel delivery to hold idle [please excuse if I'm mistaken, I barely understand this problem, I just know mine has it bad] will not take into effect the lightweight flywheel which is why they require to be stock to make sure the tune does cure the problem.
It is interesting the AMR flywheel is the same weight as the stock, I was under the impression it was lighter also. If I may, what is the difference in your AMR setup and what the factory sells? And I really got lost in the technicalities but what is the expected chatter from the twin plate in the AMR setup [not the Graziano clatter]?
I'd love to hear your input on why so many of these cars do have a stall issue and hopefully that the factory is on the right track. I believe Mathman's still has not stalled after his software update.
I’ve not been temporarily baffled by so much BS for some considerable time. You really need to either think before committing to ink or know when your mechanics derived knowledge spills over into an engineers territory and stop.
...
I haven't been on this AM forum long, but I had been impressed with how the members treat each other, even when there were differing viewpoints or knowledge bases. Whether right or wrong from a technical perspective, the tone of this response was uncalled for and the same message could have been portrayed in a much more dignified manner.
I started this thread looking for a real world perspective on whether modifying the OEM clutch setup was the right way to go, or if it would replace one set of issues with another.
I come from the large aircraft engineering world so I appreciate the knowledge and end-user experience derived from having to work with some of the "soundly engineered" technology that is put out to the consumer these days.
I haven't been on this AM forum long, but I had been impressed with how the members treat each other, even when there were differing viewpoints or knowledge bases. Whether right or wrong from a technical perspective, the tone of this response was uncalled for and the same message could have been portrayed in a much more dignified manner.
I started this thread looking for a real world perspective on whether modifying the OEM clutch setup was the right way to go, or if it would replace one set of issues with another.
I come from the large aircraft engineering world so I appreciate the knowledge and end-user experience derived from having to work with some of the "soundly engineered" technology that is put out to the consumer these days.
Keep it civil or keep it buttoned!!!
I'm sure many posts could be handled in a more dignified manner [like when somebody replied yesterday saying the Vantage was entry level crap]. But you could also say another vendors response to his very technical rebuttal was also undignified
Here's what I got from your post.
You have significant experience with Aston Martins.
Based on your reputation on the Pistonheads list, your engineering point are more that likely correct.
But did you have to belittle a fellow contributor, a tech who has contributed much to this list, just to make your points?
I appreciate everybody that takes their time to try and help others. I have a lot of experience being the tech guru in another field and an active forum member who is regularly challenged, sometimes dignified and sometimes not so much, so this is something I am quite used to from the first hand position. I can guarantee I don't always handle things the right way, we're all human and hopefully, we can all get along.
Simplifying things and explaining concepts in layman's terms isn't a sign of misunderstanding. It's an effort to help non-engineers grasp technical concepts.
I've weighed all the components being discussed. The AMR package is overall the lightest.
For what it's worth, my grey Vantage runs far better with the VelocityAP clutch/flywheel and tune than it ever did with the factory setup. It runs much more smoothly than my red Vantage, which is still stock.
For what it's worth, my grey Vantage runs far better with the VelocityAP clutch/flywheel and tune than it ever did with the factory setup. It runs much more smoothly than my red Vantage, which is still stock.
It's worth something to me. I have been reading of these stalling woes and chatter (which may or may not be related) after just purchasing the VAP assembly. If I am understanding correctly, pinning it on the VAP clutch seems to overlook all of the cars that stall that do not run a light clutch. I can understand why AM would not want to deal with an additional variable. How could they?
I can see how Irish's stuff could work, but I also see how it could not. It maybe band aiding as illustrated by Mike, but it is a machine and depending on stack up, if it works it works. Step too far out and it won't => See Rich's data above.
Mike, I appreciate your explanation. Very enlightening and makes complete sense. That said, are you suggesting Irish has not had success solving these problems as he stated? You did mention 1 out of 10. They are machines. Isn't it all a matter of resolution.
Habit - terrible what you are going thru. Such a waste. I don't remember reading - did your car stall before the VAP clutch install? Did the stall and chatter come together? Have you contacted Mike? Can he not remap your calibration based on your hardware? Based on Mikes explanation, VAP cannot help? You are going to pay to put AM clutch back in car and then go to AMR? Unbelievably painful in so many ways.
Irish - Thank You for all you do
I hope mine runs as good as Rich's. At least I have insight if it goes south. Stuart 's number is laying around somewhere.
Habit - terrible what you are going thru. Such a waste. I don't remember reading - did your car stall before the VAP clutch install? Did the stall and chatter come together? Have you contacted Mike? Can he not remap your calibration based on your hardware? Based on Mikes explanation, VAP cannot help? You are going to pay to put AM clutch back in car and then go to AMR? Unbelievably painful in so many ways.
chr
I'd have to check dates but I think I had the can about 7/8 weeks before I had it installed. I did stall it several times but it was never "odd". The clutch was smoked, the engagement point odd, the pedal was so heavy I felt my left leg grow with every drive, every time I stalled it I believe I had stalled it, I am not positive every time was my fault but that's the way I remember it. The first time I remember it being "odd" was driving home from NNJ picking it up from the service and I hit parking lot traffic and one time I went to move and the car was dead. That, was odd. Then 2 days later sitting at a red light, same thing. These were "odd", I couldn't think of any way I had affected it to make it stall. I have the B&O stereo at when you're enjoying that you don't notice a lot else, you can't hear anything else. A couple weeks and a couple stalls later I was sitting at a red light with the stereo down as I was talking with the GF and I experienced it just "die". dashboard light up. And that was the first time I realized, the car had a problem. I had done nothing, the car just died.
I have a 2007 Vantage with 30,000 miles. It may stall occasionally on a long drive but not on short drives. No clutch chatter with original clutch.
I want to upgrade to a VAP or AMR clutch but if it introduces more problems what do you do? Go back to the stock clutch? I want something that is stronger with lighter pedal pressure and the stock clutch won't offer that.
I hope these issues are resolved before I am forced to replace my clutch.
I’ve not been temporarily baffled by so much BS for some considerable time. You really need to either think before committing to ink or know when your mechanics derived knowledge spills over into an engineers territory and stop.
You do realize 90% of my day is consumed with repairing an engineering "Oops"..but what does the engineer care, it passed success for a wonderful 90 days! Yes, I'm just a grease monkey and I assume if Mike Bamford was leading Aston then all the AM mechanics worlds wide would be jobless..
Mate, seriously..if you need to bash, either send me a P.M or maybe P.H is a better place for you. If you would like to talk and discuss, your more than welcome too and correct anything I say, but the way you have come across..is not needed here.
I hope you are no longer working within the franchised Aston world? Because your assessment of how a car company complying with the latest extremely stringent emissions legislation can release to market a motor which misfires in an area governed by legislation (the speed range you state), yet a misfire code isn’t ping’d to avoid the legislation? is a very grave statement to make in reality?
Yep, can you imagine someone actually employs me to lead their franchise shop for Aston Martin!
Avoid Legislation!? Happens quite often, and not just on AM..how do I know, because I've flashed files to issue cars at request of HQ. Do they fail legislation, passes CARB annual tests so not my concern. Does the issue happen enough to flag a code, Yes the odd time dependent on country fuel, so the file is made by HQ if suspected RPM is the common trigger zone with no issues. It's not new news, especially on the non VVT V12's..when have you ever seen a USA and Canadian separate region file from AM to accommodate fueling?
Originally Posted by irish07
“As for reducing "gearbox" or "clutch" chatter..smoothen the powertrain/drivetrain. Factory does this by putting mass weights on the rotating assembly(crank pulley and flywheel). This keeps the revolutions spinning in-between combustion firing”
This feature smooths the previous uneven firing pulses and 'as if by magic' gear chatter (a gearbox problem made worse by large multi cylinder firing pulses) disappears.[/B]
So, if you input a lighter flywheel (the flywheel being a component which contributes to the inertia making the flattened off pressure peaks evened out) now has less of an influence, hence the chatter returns. Maintain the OEM single plate clutch and flywheel and delete gear rattle retard algorithm = just as much clutch chatter as a light flywheel and twinplate clutch.
You do realize my entire post and everything you've picked out to degrade was for smoothing the revolutions. The OP has not flashed his car, my extremely basic wording is dead on
The answer for the lightweight flywheel and twin plate clutch to stop gear chatter is therefore gob smackingly friggin obvious.
1-increase the gear chatter retard algorithm (if you know how!)
2- to help a little more nudge the idle speed up.
3-help anti stall algorithms catch a faster to decelerate flywheel
Again..the OP did not flash the car, but I'm sure your theory and diagnoses is perfect to resolve the issue.
No, the spark plugs ignite the mixture at the crank angle programmed to!! It’s total bull**** that any plug on the market will return decreased combustion %SD to the point the driver will appreciate.
Your missing the entire msg..a fouled/worn spark plug can ignite the combustion but creating a irregular rhythm versus a new set of plugs. If the engine and components are aged and a lightweight is installed that forces chatter, but plugs will clean the rhythm just like your diagnose of retarding timing in chatter event area's. Sure the new plugs won't resolve the issue 100% like your flash editing method, but it's a maintenance item and easy for the OP to go forth.
“the gear fluid takes up the act of a "damper" in the box, reducing the excessive backlash affect that produces chatter all the way back to the musical tuning fork we call a light weight flywheel. This way when the clutch is pressed and your not in gear OR your in gear and coasting slowing, you have things covers with plugs for the clutch chatter and thicker fluid for the box chatter(reducing issue on both ends)”
WTF? What?? Complete BS, Fill the gear box with incredibly thick Vanquish diff oil or 0w40 motor oil and whilst stationary with clutch up the chatter will be the same.
“Did the idle bump, put in a thicker trans fluid(summer driven cars) and put in a new set of plugs. Then wiped and relearned the misfire correction factors, truthfully was a done deal.”
That car was lucky in that all the recalibration needed to cure chatter was idle speed, the other stuff you did had no direct influence. I’ve seen a few Bamford Rose upgrade cars that have chatter worsened by increased idle speed, those cars needed tailored ignition retard and anti stall measures.
The idle was bumped, the chatter was present, the spark plugs were changed because of the misfire monitor flagging a count but not triggering a DTC, after the plugs the chatter reduced but was still present and I'm OCD..so I slapped in thicker trans fluid and the issue was resolved. Oh wait..I forget to mention I filled the coolant reservoir with pixie dust, sorry that must of been the solution...my bad, so yah..I'm totally full of BS, god bless you mate!!.
If a misfire profile correction is not learned, it has no influence whatsoever on any return to idle ability or any other controlling idle algorithms- this is another complete BS remark.
Nope, not true..until a P0315 is stored, the engine can stall near a stop from a decoast(has happened to me dozens of times over 13 years). I've also had engines almost die out when accelerating back up from 30mph, with the engine chugging it sets a P0315, pull over and clear the code, reattempt profile correction learning. Not every AM shop is on Fosse Way RD to learn corrections in 60 seconds. In city traffic(my living), this can range 1-2hrs to complete a misfire monitor drive cycle.. hence tripping P0315 quite often
There’s so much BS here it will take a while to sift through it, so I can’t be arsed to! All I can say is I’m glad all that unnecessary work wasn’t completed with me being the paying customer but I guess that run-down of work would baffle most folk into utter submission to happily pay the bill and run away to keep their sanity?
However i will comment on knock as its clear you don't understand the principles, knock sensed via non ionization method occurs at a very specific certain frequency, you could hammer the block with something as rock hard and dumb as my own head and the knock detection system would not register the acceleration / vibration because combustion related knock occurs at a completely different frequency than other noise - think about a valve head thumping on the seat, does knock detect that? no, so any comment about knock is completely irrelevant to this subject.
Your entire theory of retarding timing, explained by you..was to adapt the pulses to the lighter flywheel. You don't need to put 1,250 words to explain, it's summed up in 7 words(adapt the pulses to the lighter flywheel). Issue you have continued to overlook,
is what if the owners has not maintained his vehicle(beyond what they believe is required) and the firing pulse with the stock single mass creates chatter that is not detected past normal operating noises. Fitting a light weight FW will obviously increase this chatter(because of ignition being set for single clutch weight), do the simple maintenance items and you can reduce the chatter to a livable limit. You've already stated 1 in 10 cars you do have an issue that needs special attention, yet Aston Martin didn't require making a custom file for 1 in 10 cars to make the single OEM work with in livable limits. They made 1 file per model options/market...not 1 for 9 cars and an option for chatter file
What you are doing though is listing out a possible series of factors which in theory could contribute, but actually don't in reality. You are clearly not missing the main point (as you correctly state "Change design") which is, the inertia that the engine was originally calibrated to has changed, however the answer is so simple yet you don't see it? the conclusion is to re calibrate all the ECU software which is now out of spec = fully integrated product?
If I was to list possibilities, then I would of advised the OP "You should try this". Everything I've mentioned is from my own trial and error. I have no reason to run BS, but feel free to search my posts and bash at will
I have no dog in this race but I will say that Mike does add a comment that resonates well with me! He goes on to say that getting to any corner if the little island the English live on is easy, and he seems to value the clients across the pond in that he won't ship a box of parts unless he can support it
Now if the French who build the Airbus helicopters could just take a leaf from BR's garden the world would be a better and safer place.
I do think it's healthy for us mortals to read the arguments placed by the experts, be it Stuart, Irish, and BR.
I believe a healthy discussion is beneficial
To put it in simple terms when a company has two managers and they agree on everything......then sadly they don't need one.
Hey Rich...Hi I was wondering..since this thread is about 09 and up. I thought the flywheel etc.. was modified and lighter.
If possible could you do the weight on the 09 and up as HO car is a 10 model and post just wondering.
While, I am like Capt Greg... I have been lucky so far with my 09 with 34200 miles all original clutch etc... But in all fairness Irish07 helped me when it came to serving my 7 year old car...Rich helped me with finding a WONDERFUL independent company in PA.
Mike did reply to me on PH if ASM can be changed on clutch line. I have never had any business with AP but a few nice exchanges and answers by them on this site.
This threat will only finish when all you wonderful people get together and have a drink---I think!!! LOL
Hey Rich...Hi I was wondering..since this thread is about 09 and up. I thought the flywheel etc.. was modified and lighter.
I haven't had one come through but I'm happy to weigh it when I get one. The 4.7L engines came with a flywheel that is ~1 lb lighter than the 4.3L's flywheel, so it makes sense that the AMR flywheel is the same weight for the 4.7L cars. That said, the AMR clutch is MUCH lighter than the standard one and also has a smaller overall diameter. The smaller diameter and lighter weight have the same impact as a lightweight flywheel does. I also haven't compared the 4.7L flywheel to the AMR one to see if the weight of the AMR flywheel is more centrally-located. The weight distribution of each would make them perform differently even if the weight is the same.
The further from the axis the weight is located, the more effect it has. By moving all the weight toward the center (reduced weight and smaller diameter), a few pounds of weight loss has a more dramatic effect than might be expected. Both the VelocityAP and AMR clutch/flywheel packages do this. If the VelocityAP clutch/flywheel are causing stalling issues, the AMR setup will do the same. My two cents on the whole stalling concern is that there are plenty of well-documented causes of our cars stalling, and I've not heard of a single one being related to a lightweight flywheel or clutch. Fuel vapor recirculation hose, gas pedal, clutch pedal switch, throttle body, tuning, etc etc, take your pick. The factory wants the VelocityAP clutch removed so they can go back to the factory setup to more easily diagnose the problem. But I seriously doubt the clutch/flywheel is the problem. At worst, it may exacerbate the underlying issue that is causing the stalling, but it isn't the cause itself.
