| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
mlpankey 
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 8:49am |
|
thats weight . for a externally balance crank . but marty makes comments that you cant externally balance a crank. he obviously never drove a ford 302 . it never slung the weight . now you fellows runing elastic harmonic balancers might need to be cautious of slinging the outer ring
Edited by mlpankey - 20 Feb 2013 at 8:52am
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
Butch(OH)
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Lucerne Ohio
Points: 3831
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 8:38am |
Marty, The balancing blobs are a notch above the wheelie bar blobs at least, LOL
|
|
wi50
Orange Level
Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Location: weegieland
Points: 1010
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 8:28am |
 mlpankey wrote:
We will be doing some crankshaft comparative balancing analysis in a few weeks. Class will be 250 a person space is limited . Lunch will be served sweet tea and bbq. The comparitive analysis will be a inline 4 cylinder crank shaft externally balanced with no bob weights at first then introduce bob weights to see if any change to balance occurs. The other analysis will be rod journals being moved to center up rod to bore effects has on balancing . sign up now. If you would like to check a six cylinder crank bring the crank harmonic balncer flywheel clutch pressure plate and either the bob weight in grams or rod and piston assembly for us to weigh. on inline you dont suppose to put bob weights on them. on a v8 the big end doubles but not on a inline only one rod per throw . big end is rotating weight the little end is recipicating. there is such a thing as over and under balancing it is directed by rpms. |
I'll save you fella's the $$$. I'll show you for free what pank's cranks can do for you. The real question is did pankey do this himself, or was it the work of his immaginary shop? We leaves me wondering if the neighborhood toddler was playing with sparklers and the result was this....
They can weld nuclear waste on the wrong side of the pulley to balance it. But with a double imbalance (like a double negative in mathmatics) I bet it will vibration harden the rods, maybe even throw the timeing back into being spot on.
Your lawnmower blade balancer rusted up a little pank?
Edited by wi50 - 20 Feb 2013 at 8:33am
|
|
"see what happens when you have no practical experience doing something...... you end up playing with calculators and looking stupid on the internet"
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 7:57am |
|
What's this "we" sh!t? You got a mouse in your pocket?
We all know you can't teach a class. You can't even teach bullsh!tting, you're bad at that too!
Edited by Ihateillinoisnazis - 20 Feb 2013 at 7:59am
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 7:45am |
|
We will be doing some crankshaft comparative balancing analysis in a few weeks. Class will be 250 a person space is limited . Lunch will be served sweet tea and bbq. The comparitive analysis will be a inline 4 cylinder crank shaft externally balanced with no bob weights at first then introduce bob weights to see if any change to balance occurs. The other analysis will be rod journals being moved to center up rod to bore effects has on balancing . sign up now. If you would like to check a six cylinder crank bring the crank harmonic balncer flywheel clutch pressure plate and either the bob weight in grams or rod and piston assembly for us to weigh. on inline you dont suppose to put bob weights on them. on a v8 the big end doubles but not on a inline only one rod per throw . big end is rotating weight the little end is recipicating. there is such a thing as over and under balancing it is directed by rpms.
Edited by mlpankey - 20 Feb 2013 at 7:53am
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 7:35am |
|
Butch, good exination.
When dealing with spank we need to remember this is the guy who believes in forged cast rods.
Edited by Ihateillinoisnazis - 20 Feb 2013 at 7:36am
|
|
Rod B
Orange Level
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Location: Peoria
Points: 415
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Feb 2013 at 7:30am |
|
This pankey fool knows just enough to get into trouble but not enough to get out.
|
|
Butch(OH)
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Lucerne Ohio
Points: 3831
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 9:03pm |
mlpankey wrote:
Industry standard is to reduce bob weight and since the counter weight represents 50 percent of the bob weight in most instances it will reduce also but marty defys some industry standards while concuring with others. I think btyant cranks spends enough on r and d to buy most of the wisconsin farms up with their virtually no counter weights and hollow rod journals but yet marty goes in the opposite direction. Read the link it supports the industry standards and firing orders |
You don't even know enough about balancing to have fun with  That statement (and the other you just posted above this) is just a jumble of words you have heard somebody in the
balancing room say and assembled them into senseless BS.
For you and the ones that might be confused by your foolishness, here is
balance primer 101 so at least next time you dont make a total fool of
yourself. We are going to use a single cylinder engine here for simplicity but the math and terms cross to others
What makes the engine vibrate and thus the need of something to balance it
is two things not one. Rotating weight which is a circular vibration and non-rotating weight such as the piston. The rotating weight is easy, you place a weight, aka counter weight opposite and problem solved. Now there is two problems left here. The piston is going back and forth causing a vibration in line with the bore and you have the rod which is what??? It is neither in total. The pin end of the rod is more or less non-rotating and the big end is more or less rotating, Since the entire balancing job must be done on the crank how are you going to counteract the piston??. Huh?? The piston go up and down and your balance weight go round and round Pank??? The answer is compromise, or in balancing lingo "percentage". You cancel out part of the piston but not all of it or the engine will simply vibrate in a 90 degree angle to how it vibrated when unbalanced. The bob weight whose purpose you totally butchered is nothing more than a calculated weight used to balance the engine. Is not some number you shoot for when building the engine. It is the total of the rotating weight, plus a percentage of the non-reciprocating weight added to it. This would be the bob weight which is hung on the rod journal and you balance by adding weight opposite aka counterweight. So naturally when a smart builder uses the lightest components that will hold up to his use the weight of the bob used to balance the engine will be lighter. An under balanced engine (by percentage) will vibrate inline with the bore, an over balanced engine (by percentage) will vibrate perpendicular to the bore and this even changes with RPM once you are close. Somewhere in between is the best we can do. Obviously this is many feet above your level of understanding Pank but maybe others will benefit. What WI50 is saying is with no counterweights on the inline 6 you must transfer all of these forces through the crank to the piston that is going in the opposite direction. In the case of number 1 that would be number 6 Pank, all the way at the other end. #2 is countered by #5 and #3 by #4. Isnt hard to see why at his HP levels that would twist and break cranks. Wasnt it you who just today said that timing at individual cylinders was like the holy grail of found power?? Now you say it is better to use the crank as a torsion bar to balance the engine than to balance it at each cylinder and eliminate the twist??? Please make up your mind and argue one way or the other I get dizy easily. The builder you mention and most others will mention a bob weight because they don't want the counterweights added to or subtracted from excessively and compromising the crank, this is why they offer several bob weight ranges in popular strokes. If you are building the entire engine in the shop like Marty you simply design the crank weights around the parts that make to power, not the other way around,
One of these days, maybe,,if you ever build engine #2 and get your head out where the sun shines. You will learn that what you learned on #1 does not apply across all engines, all applications, all HP and all configurations,,,, , Remember #1 went 5 runs and KABOOM!!!!
Sorry guys just in one of those moods today I guess?
Edited by Butch(OH) - 19 Feb 2013 at 9:14pm
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 8:40pm |
|
Ok i am smarty marty the air flow expert i am going to turn my engine at least double to three times its factory rpm. I have this 1 1/2 hp cnc that can mill out a harder material than factory rod so i can slim line it while making it longer so its still 50 perzent lightee than factory. I then can run a 50 percent lighter piston and ring package. Cause i raised the pin location and dont need the heavier wider rings after all a thinner ring is a better seal. Now necause i am going to turn it so much harder i am going to add more weight to the counter weight.which already represents 150 percent of my bob weight. So know i am 250 percent over my bob weight with my superior weight adding skills and that is going to reduce any damage caused from vibration.lol
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 8:24pm |
mlpankey wrote:
[QUOTE=Ihateillinoisnazis]
Do I spy with my little eye... Balance weights on a Bryant crank???? Hmmmm
Also Pankey, that link you posted and refer to so often, Did you read it at all? [/CRANES] so you pull a picture of a bryant with small counter weights now slug it with mallory when you cant hit their target bob weight. Oh wait if you had one you would have the warning not to but to externally balance when target bob weight is not attainable. |
Dafq are you taking about? Really.. quit rambling, post something useful, or go suck on a slug of used uranium or something.
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 8:03pm |
[QUOTE=Ihateillinoisnazis]
Do I spy with my little eye... Balance weights on a Bryant crank???? Hmmmm
Also Pankey, that link you posted and refer to so often, Did you read it at all? [/CRANES] so you pull a picture of a bryant with small counter weights now slug it with mallory when you cant hit their target bob weight. Oh wait if you had one you would have the warning not to but to externally balance when target bob weight is not attainable.
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 7:54pm |
Do I spy with my little eye... Balance weights on a Bryant crank???? Hmmmm
Also Pankey, that link you posted and refer to so often, Did you read it at all?
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 7:41pm |
|
Industry standard is to reduce bob weight and since the counter weight represents 50 percent of the bob weight in most instances it will reduce also but marty defys some industry standards while concuring with others. I think btyant cranks spends enough on r and d to buy most of the wisconsin farms up with their virtually no counter weights and hollow rod journals but yet marty goes in the opposite direction. Read the link it supports the industry standards and firing orders
|
|
Rod B
Orange Level
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Location: Peoria
Points: 415
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 6:03pm |
|
I asked those questions to see if you knew anything about balance pankey. You said you didn't, and now are showing your lack of experience. That article only backs up what wi said. Fireing order doesn't effect balance.
Nice try but you're still wrong pank.
Edited by Rod B - 19 Feb 2013 at 6:07pm
|
|
CTuckerNWIL
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: NW Illinois
Points: 22810
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 5:52pm |
I can just about bet Pankster was a professor of matrix algebra at the U of Panky and understands all this paper talks about  I read somewhere in there they were using 1900 rpm too. 
|
|
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 5:38pm |
|
Oh, Pankey please stop PM'ing me about this. I'd much rather keep this discussion out in the public :)
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 5:06pm |
Pankey, I asked how the firing order effects "BALANCE" of a rotating mass. Not how it effect vibration.
That paper talks about modal analysis of a crankshaft, which by the way is finding the natural frequency a material, object, or structure vibrates at. (Everything has a natural frequency) By testing different firing orders they are making the crankshaft "ring" at a different frequency. If you make the crankshaft "ring" within it's natural frequency vibration amplitudes will significantly increase. (10-30x increase vs not in the range of resonance) So once you know the natural frequency of an object you can change it by adding mass, increasing stiffness, or in the case of the paper avoid the resonance range by changing the firing order. We all know when things run smooth they last longer. (Unlike that crank pulley you tried to balance)
Balance is a topic I will let you explore on your own. The way you appear to balance cranks is discussion for a whole new topic. A little secret to start you off, you can't balance a crank on a single plane (Ex: welding gobs of dung to a crank pulley).
There's a big difference between vibration due to resonance and vibration due to imbalance. Keep trying Spunk.
|
|
AC200Puller
Orange Level
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Points: 774
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 4:47pm |
|
Wi 50 what are you building for a tractor ? I would like to see the finished product always great to walk around a fine piece of equipment and drool!
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 4:31pm |
Ihateillinoisnazis wrote:
mlpankey wrote:
wi50 wrote:
Rod B wrote:
Spunkster, why don't you explain to us why a 426 AC crank has no counterweight? Why a JD has weights on all and why an IH 400 series has weights on 4 of the 6 cylinders? Of the 3 why is the non weighted AC crank the most likely to fail? Cummins and Cat are weighted.
Or better yet why pullers need to add the weights for durability? |
<FONT>
<FONT>
<FONT>
Well I'm not the spunkster, he can't answer and at least admitted it this time before makeing up some bs. The non weighted ones fail the most..... the rest of the block is just plain strong enough to transfer the loads. It's "forced" into being balanced, somewhere down the line on the crank.
But the weighted cranks help, the load is transfered across the crank rather than to another cylinder somewhere down the line.
If you look at some cranks that are weighted on all the cylinders, the weights oppose the crankpin by180*. The ones weiighted on 4 of the 6 cylinders have the weights clocked slightly off on some of the crankpins, some of the weights are 180* off the crankpin and some are clocked differently. 1 weight of the pair for one cylinder will be 180* off and the other weight for that cylinder will be clocked to help the non weighted cylinders on those cranks.
Spankey can look at the fireing orders, but it doesn't make any difference. Gas, diesel, same difference.
Additional weight is added on these high RPM pulling cranks to hopefully completly nutralize the rod and piston unit, on each throw with minimal transfer elsewhere in the rotating assembly. It's got enough stress on it.
Stock cranks will run up pretty fast but will eventually throw themselves apart, we all know that. Weighted ones will run faster, and ones with all cylinders counterweighted and added weights will run untill the lifters spit out the block or the rod bolts pull.
Wild, Bill, just plain stock main caps in the block, decked and a 1" thick alumnium girdle with a block between the girdle and plate. |
you need to research the firing order a little more . |
I'd love to learn how firing order effects the balance of a rotating mass. Please explain using proper spelling. punctuation, and grammar so all can understand without having to decipher your gibberish. -Oh please cite your sources; and don't use Wikipedia, professors hated that. |
http://suw.biblos.pk.edu.pl/resources/i1/i0/i2/i5/r1025/MitianiecW_TorsionalVibration.pdf
|
|
CTuckerNWIL
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: NW Illinois
Points: 22810
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 3:43pm |
"Some are given to prophecy, Some to invention Some to leadership However some were placed here simply to move heavy objects" Yet others we can just wonder about
|
|
|
|
Butch(OH)
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: Lucerne Ohio
Points: 3831
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 3:37pm |
wi50 wrote:
Well I'm not the spunkster, he can't answer and at least admitted it this time before makeing up some bs. The non weighted ones fail the most..... the rest of the block is just plain strong enough to transfer the loads. It's "forced" into being balanced, somewhere down the line on the crank.
But the weighted cranks help, the load is transfered across the crank rather than to another cylinder somewhere down the line.
If you look at some cranks that are weighted on all the cylinders, the weights oppose the crankpin by180*. The ones weiighted on 4 of the 6 cylinders have the weights clocked slightly off on some of the crankpins, some of the weights are 180* off the crankpin and some are clocked differently. 1 weight of the pair for one cylinder will be 180* off and the other weight for that cylinder will be clocked to help the non weighted cylinders on those cranks.
Spankey can look at the fireing orders, but it doesn't make any difference. Gas, diesel, same difference.
Additional weight is added on these high RPM pulling cranks to hopefully completly nutralize the rod and piston unit, on each throw with minimal transfer elsewhere in the rotating assembly. It's got enough stress on it.
Stock cranks will run up pretty fast but will eventually throw themselves apart, we all know that. Weighted ones will run faster, and ones with all cylinders counterweighted and added weights will run untill the lifters spit out the block or the rod bolts pull.
Wild, Bill, just plain stock main caps in the block, decked and a 1" thick alumnium girdle with a block between the girdle and plate. |
Proof positive that people who actually know something can explain the complicated in simple terms. We now await the VI and a 1000 word response,, with no periods, commas or capitalization.
|
|
CTuckerNWIL
Orange Level
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Location: NW Illinois
Points: 22810
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 3:32pm |
I think all but one of us Know who's firing order isn't right
|
|
|
|
WildBill
Silver Level
Joined: 26 Aug 2012
Location: Mandan,ND
Points: 190
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 3:13pm |
|
Thanks Marty.. Was only wondering with the rotating mass change if a person was to 4 bolt front and rear main caps ? But yes a girdle tied into it would make sense. Thanks.
|
|
Allis fan for life ! B,C,2-WC'S,WD45G,D19G,190xt ,LLSS 8010, terra tiger refurbished
|
|
Glockhead SWMI
Orange Level
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Location: South West Mich
Points: 2657
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 2:59pm |
Well... when your firing order isn't right it vibrates like crazy...... lol....
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 1:54pm |
mlpankey wrote:
wi50 wrote:
Rod B wrote:
Spunkster, why don't you explain to us why a 426 AC crank has no counterweight? Why a JD has weights on all and why an IH 400 series has weights on 4 of the 6 cylinders? Of the 3 why is the non weighted AC crank the most likely to fail? Cummins and Cat are weighted.
Or better yet why pullers need to add the weights for durability? |
<FONT>
<FONT>
<FONT>
Well I'm not the spunkster, he can't answer and at least admitted it this time before makeing up some bs. The non weighted ones fail the most..... the rest of the block is just plain strong enough to transfer the loads. It's "forced" into being balanced, somewhere down the line on the crank.
But the weighted cranks help, the load is transfered across the crank rather than to another cylinder somewhere down the line.
If you look at some cranks that are weighted on all the cylinders, the weights oppose the crankpin by180*. The ones weiighted on 4 of the 6 cylinders have the weights clocked slightly off on some of the crankpins, some of the weights are 180* off the crankpin and some are clocked differently. 1 weight of the pair for one cylinder will be 180* off and the other weight for that cylinder will be clocked to help the non weighted cylinders on those cranks.
Spankey can look at the fireing orders, but it doesn't make any difference. Gas, diesel, same difference.
Additional weight is added on these high RPM pulling cranks to hopefully completly nutralize the rod and piston unit, on each throw with minimal transfer elsewhere in the rotating assembly. It's got enough stress on it.
Stock cranks will run up pretty fast but will eventually throw themselves apart, we all know that. Weighted ones will run faster, and ones with all cylinders counterweighted and added weights will run untill the lifters spit out the block or the rod bolts pull.
Wild, Bill, just plain stock main caps in the block, decked and a 1" thick alumnium girdle with a block between the girdle and plate. |
you need to research the firing order a little more . |
I'd love to learn how firing order effects the balance of a rotating mass. Please explain using proper spelling. punctuation, and grammar so all can understand without having to decipher your gibberish. -Oh please cite your sources; and don't use Wikipedia, professors hated that.
|
|
mlpankey
Orange Level
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Location: Vols country
Points: 4580
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 1:43pm |
wi50 wrote:
Rod B wrote:
Spunkster, why don't you explain to us why a 426 AC crank has no counterweight? Why a JD has weights on all and why an IH 400 series has weights on 4 of the 6 cylinders? Of the 3 why is the non weighted AC crank the most likely to fail? Cummins and Cat are weighted.
Or better yet why pullers need to add the weights for durability? |
Well I'm not the spunkster, he can't answer and at least admitted it this time before makeing up some bs. The non weighted ones fail the most..... the rest of the block is just plain strong enough to transfer the loads. It's "forced" into being balanced, somewhere down the line on the crank.
But the weighted cranks help, the load is transfered across the crank rather than to another cylinder somewhere down the line.
If you look at some cranks that are weighted on all the cylinders, the weights oppose the crankpin by180*. The ones weiighted on 4 of the 6 cylinders have the weights clocked slightly off on some of the crankpins, some of the weights are 180* off the crankpin and some are clocked differently. 1 weight of the pair for one cylinder will be 180* off and the other weight for that cylinder will be clocked to help the non weighted cylinders on those cranks.
Spankey can look at the fireing orders, but it doesn't make any difference. Gas, diesel, same difference.
Additional weight is added on these high RPM pulling cranks to hopefully completly nutralize the rod and piston unit, on each throw with minimal transfer elsewhere in the rotating assembly. It's got enough stress on it.
Stock cranks will run up pretty fast but will eventually throw themselves apart, we all know that. Weighted ones will run faster, and ones with all cylinders counterweighted and added weights will run untill the lifters spit out the block or the rod bolts pull.
Wild, Bill, just plain stock main caps in the block, decked and a 1" thick alumnium girdle with a block between the girdle and plate. |
you need to research the firing order a little more .
|
|
wi50
Orange Level
Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Location: weegieland
Points: 1010
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 1:14pm |
Rod B wrote:
Spunkster, why don't you explain to us why a 426 AC crank has no counterweight? Why a JD has weights on all and why an IH 400 series has weights on 4 of the 6 cylinders? Of the 3 why is the non weighted AC crank the most likely to fail? Cummins and Cat are weighted.
Or better yet why pullers need to add the weights for durability? |
Well I'm not the spunkster, he can't answer and at least admitted it this time before makeing up some bs. The non weighted ones fail the most..... the rest of the block is just plain strong enough to transfer the loads. It's "forced" into being balanced, somewhere down the line on the crank.
But the weighted cranks help, the load is transfered across the crank rather than to another cylinder somewhere down the line.
If you look at some cranks that are weighted on all the cylinders, the weights oppose the crankpin by180*. The ones weiighted on 4 of the 6 cylinders have the weights clocked slightly off on some of the crankpins, some of the weights are 180* off the crankpin and some are clocked differently. 1 weight of the pair for one cylinder will be 180* off and the other weight for that cylinder will be clocked to help the non weighted cylinders on those cranks.
Spankey can look at the fireing orders, but it doesn't make any difference. Gas, diesel, same difference.
Additional weight is added on these high RPM pulling cranks to hopefully completly nutralize the rod and piston unit, on each throw with minimal transfer elsewhere in the rotating assembly. It's got enough stress on it.
Stock cranks will run up pretty fast but will eventually throw themselves apart, we all know that. Weighted ones will run faster, and ones with all cylinders counterweighted and added weights will run untill the lifters spit out the block or the rod bolts pull.
Wild, Bill, just plain stock main caps in the block, decked and a 1" thick alumnium girdle with a block between the girdle and plate.
|
|
"see what happens when you have no practical experience doing something...... you end up playing with calculators and looking stupid on the internet"
|
|
WildBill
Silver Level
Joined: 26 Aug 2012
Location: Mandan,ND
Points: 190
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 12:27pm |
|
Crank looks awesome Marty! Is that held in with custom 4 bolt main caps ? Billet? Just curious?
|
|
Allis fan for life ! B,C,2-WC'S,WD45G,D19G,190xt ,LLSS 8010, terra tiger refurbished
|
|
unstylish_
Silver Level
Joined: 19 Dec 2012
Location: southwestern Mi
Points: 129
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 11:57am |
Pank stated that us bench pullers need to read wikiopedia more often...Look stupid, dont you know that ANYONE can edit Wikipedia? Why dont you go over there and try to look smart. Its not cutting it here anymore..You are the kind of guy who likes to spread his BS...there is your chance. Man Im glad BK has the internet...knocking panks dick in the dirt...best lunch break all week.. 
|
|
Ihateillinoisnazis
Orange Level
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Location: By The Lake
Points: 273
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Feb 2013 at 11:06am |
Glockhead SWMI wrote:
Why is this guy still here? Produce something! Nice pics wi. |
So true. Didn't be say he was building some engine the other week?? How come we never hear about panks projects or get to see pictures. Even better, hear of a happy customer. I mean nothing can be that top secret, Wi posts pics and he's pictured in national magazines as a winner. The only pictures of panks I've seen we're featured on this forum as bent rods hahah. I guess In panks mind he who throws the rod the farthest wins. Maybe he should take up shot putting.
|
|
