[blykins]

R/K,

It's very possible.

Here's the thing while looking at this logically:

No one has proven that the bellhousing failed in this one case.

No one has proven that the bellhousing has not passed SFI testing (which BTW, is not the same thing as being SFI 6.1 approved).

I would have no problem saying that the bellhousing was at fault if it was. However, being a mechanical engineer, it's been drilled into my head that you have to be objective, see both sides of the scenario, gather data, then make a decision.

There's not enough data to make a decision.

Yes, like many here, I'm a proponent of Quicktime bellhousings. I should be; I sell their products. You know what, it's as simple as this: if you're worried about flywheel explosion containment, then by all means, go for the SFI 6.1 bellhousing. If you're going to trim the bottom off anyway, then there's no real use in it.

If Jason wants to do some more investigating, get some SFI results, etc., then that's great and it would be interesting to see.

However, I'd really like to know what his motive is in all of this. He has put it that "my customers and future customers have raised concerns", but while thinking back through the threads, he's the only one that I've seen complaining.