Feel free to help yourself now to debate it as you imagine........... and to save face on the internet

 

I'm still waiting patiently for you to answer any question with a response based on actual facts or experience. I'm responding just so nobody is misled by the assumptions you continue to make, without factual support.

Trial and error is NOT the same thing as guessing -- it's the process that either proves or disproves your "guess", based on real world experience. In other words, an opinion based on the results of "trial and error" has value; your guess does not.

You changed the topic from harmonic balancers to balance shafts. You apparently think they are the same. They are not. You've still failed to supply any fact that supports your claims of the cause of balance shaft bearing failure, or which support a need for your new oil line to the rear bearing of the balance shaft, deep in the block. I ask you to supply the basis for your guess on the cause of balance shaft failure and tell us how you intend to route an oil line to an relatively inaccessable area, and why you would think that was any useful solution. You respond that you "have not researched it", and that you "assume" that oil passages are different then the late 80s, which was not a part of the topic or even your previous post.

What does this have to do with an Evo motor? Not a single useful fact to be found. Plain and simple, you don't have any idea what you are talking about. Have you ever taken a 4g63 engine of any era apart?

AMS, Shepherd and Curt Brown ALL use harmonic balancers, which is the topic that this thread is about.

On the topic of balance shafts (which this thread is NOT about), you are also incorrect. Dave Buschur sponsors John Shepherd and supplies his engines, which are 6 bolt 4g63 DSM engines WITHOUT balance shafts. Curt Brown also used a Buschur Racing shortblock, when he had his Evo. Buschur Racing shortblocks eliminate balance shafts. I've owned several. AMS EVO VIII shortblocks eliminate balance shafts, too, although AMS uses a shaft with the eccentric weight cut off on the oil pump side to support the back end of the oil pump shaft. You can read that directly on their web page. But we digress....

Your last two posts are the same as your previous -- no knowledge, mistaken "assumptions". Please do your homework so others will not be confused by your fantasy opinions.

 

How sure are you of this?

 

Again, balance shafts have absolutely NOTHING TO DO with harmonic vibrations. This thread is NOT about balance shafts. Many people run without balance shafts with no ill effects at all, except more vibrations felt in the interior during idle. The only reason why people tend to shy away from deleting the balance shafts is oil pressure. When removing the balance shafts you either block the bearing oil supply or just let it drip down into the pan. If you just let it drip, you will lose oil pressure (very dangerous). If you block the oil passage (by rotating the old bearing) it will increase oil pressure (also potentially dangerous during startup). The rotating assembly in the 4G63 is balanced enough to run without balance shafts without harm. Personally I wouldn't want to mess with it because I do not want to alter the stock oil pressure, and the extra vibrations felt in the interior would annoy me. It should be noted that, if you were unlucky enough to receive a very unbalanced engine from the factory, it probably would not be a good idea to remove the balance shafts.

Maybe the topic has moved on to balance shafts because everyone now knows the truth - harmonic balancers do indeed serve a purpose, and you should not be running without one.

 

If you remove the balance shafts, it removes a lot of the rotational masses plus you have only less belt to worry about snapping and hitting the timing belt. Of course there is the Oil Pressure issu BUT I believe RRE offers a kit that stabolizes the pressure issue.

 

Hi guys,

Sorry for my late reply on my findings with my motor. Took it apart yesterday and the results are indeed very interesting. After running at over 8000 rpms on this stroker 2.3 motor and at 35 psi making 750 WHP/656 ft/ib WTQ, the bearings were in good reasonable condition and take note, this motor was run WITH a brand new stock Mitsubishi harmonic damper, crank pulley. I swear what I saw was surprising on what I revved the motor to ( 8500 rpm at times on the track). To add to the topic of balance shafts, this motor was built without balance shafts at all. The motor has seen done 40 dyno pulls and 10 full on passes down the track at the drags..

On my earlier post, I mentioned that the mains were worn right down to metal at a lower power level ( 670 WHP) and at less rpms at the track. This was on a brand new rebuilt motor with only 7 passes down the track and about 30 dyno pulls.

The above findings I found was on the same motor except that I replaced a set of brand new Clevites on it and the new Mitsubishi crank pulley and I was all ready to replace it again yesterday but hey there you go guys.... there is no dispute that the damper is there for a reason and for a very good reason in fact.... no more aluminium pulleys for me...

Will get photos posted later...

 

Good stuff. It's good to finally see someone do an apples to apples test for this. Was your tune any different between the rebuilds? Do you think detonation could have played a role in determining the shape of your rod bearings?

 

The engine was pulled apart and I can say that my mixture was perfect since there was ZERO detonation and the pistons and combustion chamber was in perfect condition. I was running the 37R with this and there was no tune difference except that it was maybe .2 of an A/F leaner with the C16.

It's all in the crank damper. I have been using the aluminium underdrive pulleys for the last 10 years and I never had an engine failure with it but it now explains why I have less life span in my motors especially big power and boost is concerned.

It was Carmela from Jackson's that warned me against using a pulley. I took her word and there we go...the difference is obvious especially in a 2.3 stroker.

 

can we lay this to rest now

 

Whereas I once considered the arguments of the lightweight pulley makers (have one on my car now), I find myself absolutely convinced of the advantage of using a harmonic dampener. I feel confident that I now have a firm understanding in the subject, and I recommend everyone to consider the results of this discussion.

 

true

 

so someone tell me... are any of the damper pullies lightened?

 

So with this known, the ATI's are a good investment. Even better at dampening than the stocker...

 

nah, the fluidampr has a lower cost.

 

Apparently the aftermarket dampers work at all rpms whereas the factory piece is more ' tuned ' at a higher rpm. This is what I was told and I have recently purchased a Fluidamper for my Evo and it is an awesome looking piece, bit heavy though but what the heck, it saves my motor...

There you go guys, guess most of us found out the hard way...even myself..