914 flywheel vs a bus flywheel, any differences? Options

[malcolm2]

I sure can’t see any.

Building a 2.0 from a 1.8 from a 914 for my 72 bus that came with a 1.7. Have both flywheels. I did not label either. The 914 was running when removed so it must be the shinier one. The bus sat in a field for 10 years. So much moisture under there that the magnesium bell housing deteriorated.

Anyway, both are 210 mm. Some vendors say their 914 FW won’t work on a bus and visa-versa.

Anyone have more details?

[GregAmy]

One thing I see is that the one on the left does not have the step for the pilot bearing "seal" (a round piece of basically felt that you oil.) Do both have the inside groove for the o-ring?

Measure the flange thicknesses and offsets, see if there's a difference.

Edit: also, check the offset of the ring gear versus its inner base flange (where it mates to the crankshaft.) I seem to recall a prior discussion that this offset was slightly different due to the difference in transaxles used. If so, the 901 trans starter gear may improperly engage with the flywheel ring gear.

[malcolm2]

One thing I see is that the one on the left does not have the step for the pilot bearing "seal" (a round piece of basically flannel.) Do both have the inside groove for the o-ring?

Measure the flange thicknesses and offsets, see if there's a difference.

doesn't the "step" come from the fact that the pilot bearing is slightly smaller (shorter) than the thickness of the hole?

The FW on the right still has the pilot bearing installed. FW on the left has the Pilot bearing removed.

And Yes, both have an o-ring groove, even still have the o-rings installed.