Competition DTT Reactor SFI flexplate

[COMP461]

Ok I believe I have solved the riddle of why!!!!



After talking to Richard , and discussing the various possibilities ,Together we have come up with one possible reason .

First remember this is a ford transmission , an a Cummins transmission , the adaptor is similar to the one I first built. To successfully build a good adaptor, you need to make it where the rear or the donor motor mimics in every way the back or the motor you are trying to imitate . Spacing of bell housing flange , spacing in relation of the crank flange , and the centering ring for the flywheel and the pilot for the center of the converter , including the depth and height of the centering ring / pilot piece . I witnessed a similar , but not quit as drastic failure on a HEMI Top Fuel crank, where we put it in a Big Block Chrysler as a stoker. The pilot on this crank was much larger then the street motor , with out anything to center on, the Flexplate cracked.

You must center the pilot of the converter on the crank , and not the flexplate , or the whole assembly will wobble. This could also take out the front pump and other transmission parts . also costing power in the bind. No telling how fast Richard will go without the bound up transmission , if that proves to be the cause



The moral of this storm is not to bash a product , and if you have a problem you should

take care of it with the guy that built the part , and let him make it better, if his fault , or let him help you fix your problem. Also if you a big muckatie muck with a sanction what ever , don’t get it the mix , stay above the bickering and fighting , don’t start blaming a product that hasn’t shown to be a weak part in the past , until you have real black and white proof it was the cause , and then you let them fix it , unless you want to continue to alienate more people then already

 

[DavidTD]

All that should matter here is do we have a safety concern.



Eric - Neal? We have "other" flex plates that have been working for years without failure and at this point that is what we will use. If we can't run, fine, we will not run. I'll wait to here from you as to whether we can make the events. This is serious folks.



From a racer stand-point, I applaud Richard for bringing this to our attention.



Stephan, if safety is a concern for you and DTT, then instead of aggresively responding to Richard, produce some facts from SFI, a findings report would be nice. But you have claimed BS from the get go, even before you had the broken plate in your hands. Sometimes things fail in ways we never would expect. Just because there is no rotational damage only tells me it came APART with no rotation. It still could have easily been cracked and in the process of full failure before. Richard never said it failed while on the dyno, or on the street. This alone becomes a possibility that should be looked at in depth, not discounted because you suspect it as BS.



DHRA needs to also make a decision here.



Thanks,

 

[Sled Puller]

Whats amazing here, was that the product, nor DTT were bashed at all. And Reactor definately wasn't bashed.



Questions were asked, and instead of a serious investigation of WHY, a ludicrous story came from DTT, that someone had sabotaged the broken part to "get them. " Open, shut, case closed. And thats where the roadblock went up.



Lets just assume for one second that NO FOUL PLAY is involved, and what COMP suggests is the problem. That would make most of the previous 5 pages of posts look very foolish.



I think somebody needs to get the foul play bit out of his head, and figure out what happened, for REAL.

 

[snowracer69]

. Sometimes things fail in ways we never would expect. Just because there is no rotational damage only tells me it came APART with no rotation.

Sorry, you're wrong about that.



If there was rotational damage it would be simple and easy to spot by ANYONE who has EVER purposely failed a part in such a manner, or seen a part failed in that manner in the past. Have you ever done tensile or compression tests on aluminum? The manner in which the material failed is obvious to the naked eye, and even MORE obvious when put under a microscope. Rotational damage is the same way and would be easy to spot.

It still could have easily been cracked and in the process of full failure before.

Again, this is easy to spot, even if the plate was only cracked when it came off the pickup, and then it was failed (or fully broken) in another manner once off (ie, broken out by hand or force). If it was in the process of failing due to rotational damage it would show itself on the fracture surface



I would really like to get my hands on that flexplate and put it under a microscope and let someone with lots of experience in this area take a look-see at it...



somebody put up a report from SFI or post a phone number so we can get the report from the horse's mouth... the more technical and engineer oriented the better!

 

[fox]

Sled Puller, why did MADDOG2 post here if his intent wasn't to bash DTT?????????????



I am for his and everyone's safety.

He should tell us his install was a modified one.

Using adapters can quickly be the cause . Did he post on the internet about the SELLER of the adapters??? NO.

Did he send to DTT the adapters?

Can he tell us more about the aledged jaw marks?

Did he call SFI and ask for a writen answer, before the posting?



If I was a sponsor of a racer acting like this I would withdraw and avoid him.

Unless I approved of it.

 

[DavidTD]

Again, not a dig at DTT or Maddog. But we DO have a failed part that could effect it's SFI certification. The racers using this product need to know if it will remain certified.



Eric / Neal - Am I correct that a SFI certified flex plate is required if turning 4500 rpm or more?



And please everyone, this is not about Maddog or DTT but a product. If those two have issues, they can work on those themselves but I would hope Richard would not present false data just to make a vendor look bad. If he did, that is a different story all together but regardless, an official response on the product certification is what we require.



Hopefully this will be worked out soon. I also think DTT introduced a product manufactured by a reputable company to satisfy what racer's needed. This is not a "blame" issue and even if the product failed, has no bearing on DTT's reputation or quality of products they supply. It only means we have discovered a weakness that would need to be addressed by Reactor.

 

[Steve St.Laurent]

Both parties involved have told their sides of the story at this point along with quite a bit of discussion. Further discussion isn't going to lead anywhere but further down. If someone comes up with facts from a 3rd party and wants them added to this thread pm me and we will add it otherwise this thread is closed.



-Steve St. Laurent

 

[Steve St.Laurent]

Received today:

Two years ago when DHRA started as an SFI member, Carl Olson and I talked about what products may need to be changed due to the diesel’s low-end torque. So when Richard Madsen contacted me about his flex plate breaking on the dyno during the ATS dyno event, I saw it as an opportunity for DHRA and SFI to learn more about the failure. I called Carl at SFI Foundation Inc. and told him what happened as told to me by Richard, and even though it didn’t happen on the track, Carl said to document the situation and send the product to them for analysis. We talked about looking at the product to see if a separate SFI flex plate specification would be necessary for diesel applications.

SFI received the flex plate, examined it, took photographs and created the carrier log (a detailed document that prevents any tampering of the product as it is passed between sanctioning body, SFI and manufacturer). The product was sent to Reactor for their inspection. After a confidential conversation between Reactor and SFI, the parts were sent back to SFI for further analysis. SFI Foundation has told me that upon initial inspection, the damage did not look “out of the ordinary” for failure and has been sent to SFI engineering for complete examination. At this time, SFI has not made a determination of how the product failed. The whole reasoning behind the DHRA/SFI inspection is to only learn about the failure, document it and better the safety standards for diesel applications. Special thanks goes out to Richard Madsen, Diesel Transmission Technologies, and Reactor Products for their time and efforts in this investigation. DHRA at this time would like to acknowledge that the business practices of DTT are not our concern nor do we wish to participate in any situations that are between them and their customers. We are solely concerned about our member’s safety and I will publish the findings as they become available. Thank you. Eric McBride, CEO of DHRA Inc.