Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the for number and info. :D

I thought I will look into a RB30 bottom end as I will have to rebuilt mine anyway but after reading that great guide you guys made It looks alittle more complex especially with the RB25DET head (welding head and running seperate oil feed etc).

In regards to an earlier post by Cubes about the dude on the calias forum....

Today i put both the standard (rb30) and a rb26 harmonic balancer(dampener) in the lathe to do some mild machining work on them and its no wonder these engines have harmonic problems. The dampener is that far from running true its not funny. I thought this might be a stuffed one or something so i grabbed two other rb25 ones and cheked and its the same.. Now if you run them in the lathe looking side on at them like this [] it runs true but look at it from the front ( ) and the outside circle is not runing true to the inside circle ie. the crank hole.... This is a big problem and its due to how they are manufactured with the rubber sandwiched between two planes, the outer circles can be squashed down uneven...

Multiply this by 7000+RPM and i can see why the balancers tend to wander around on the end of the shaft, and the logicbehind using the heaver rb25,26 dampeners is that they probably do it less due to the weight. Now i trued mine up and it wasnt that hard and had to re balance it, as you will notice on the standard item there are a heap of holes cut out to try and balance them, which tells me they arent made that great from the factory.

If i hadnt invested so much time setting up the gilmer belt setup on my existing dampener i would definately of tried to modify a fluid filled chev unit to suit the rb30, especially for anything over 600hp.

Hope this adds some info for those interested in trying to sort out harmonic dampeners.

Very Very Interesting...

I've never ever looked at them front on when they are spinning at speed, for obvious reasons (how hard is it to see behind the radiator), however i may go spin one up in a lathe to see how bad they actually are.

Are the two parts vulcanised together by the rubber or is the rubber some sort of dampening material or both?

I suppose they are a mass produced part afterall.

And under standard power it wouldn't be too much of a concern,

However a critical piece in the puzzle when searching for more reliable HP at higher RPM especially.

I do have to admit. My RB20DET harmonic balancer was very out of balance from factory.

I can't say I've noticed it being out of true.

With the belts etc all on and tensioned up correctly mine sits perfectly still. No wobbles either way.

Its not to say it isn't though.

How is it possible to make true?, what part is actually out of wack?

to true it up i just slightly machined the outer circumfrances, on an rb26 or 25 pully there is a fair bit of metal there that you can get running true to the centre hole... Having done that i still needed to balance it as i didnt square up the ribs where the belts run to run true with the center hole (crank hole). So if you look at your balancer from the back you will see its made in a few parts.... The center where the crank runs through is one cast piece and treat this as your center... There is another piece around this which is about the same size as you front pully then there is another piece that goes around it, these all have rubber sandwiched between them to dampen harmonics...I simply true up the very outside one, which is probably the furthest one out anyway, and its the only one you really get to....

The problem is you would never notice not running true one on the vehicle for a few reasons... you can never really look at it straight on, and with all the belts in place it hides a good view of the balancer. 700Hp would have noticed it on the engine dyno cause you can look at the engine quite carefully, thats why he mentions it....

I admit you cant totally make it true but you can improve on what is there!!!

Interestering.. So its not really the metal that is out, its the rubber that is throwing the outer ring out of true. Machining up the metal simply compensates.

That being said once loaded up with belt tension from the a/c, waterpump etc would this pull it in? Being rubber I would assume so?

I really couldn't give a rats about the out of round, a harmonic balancer is supposed to run out of round, after all that's how it dampens the harmonics. That's why the rubber is there, to allow for it. Obviously a dynamic balance is a good idea when the harmonic balancer is coupled with a balanced engine.:D

I've been doing a little bit of reading up on harmonic balancers.

The outer ring being ever so slightly untrue makes SFA difference to the reliability of an engine. Providing its all balanced as SK stated it will not create an issue when spinning.

What will reduce the reliability of an engine is removing noticable amounts of weight from that outer ring.

The weight in the outer ring in conjunction with the highly compressed rubber helps absorb the shock pulses.

That being said the reading I've done also stated that a bad harmonic balancer WILL cause oil pump crank engangement failures.

Is there any difference to the R32 and R33 harmonic balancers?

More importantly, is there any difference to the R33 Series 1 and R33 Series 2 harmonic balancers?

EDIT: Lightening the totally assembly will reduce the intensity of the shock.

*cough* Wiseco are the lightest pistons *cough* lol. :D

I took about 22 grams of metal out so Im not concerned about that part. I ran the balancer up on a lathe at 6000RPM and you should see the thing its absolute crap, just spending 20 mins trueing it up a bit just makes me feel better, and having it balanced indipendant to the motor is worth its while.

My main point is the standard unit is pretty damn rubbish, and i can see how it could cause possible problems especially the rb30 one (hence why we don't use them) having known what I know now I would have definately invested the time in modifying a chev or ford fluid dampener to suit!!! I thought i would mention my experience and for the time invested read: not much, it makes sense to spend some effort on your stock unit!!! Cheers

There's a little link floating around on the specs of different pistons.

The Wiseco's also tend to have the thickest ring land and are one of the few Slipper type pistons.

I wouldn't imagine heavier would be better, it has to be engineered to suit the application.

These Fluid types.. Are they heavier? or is it the fluid is much more efficient at absorbing the shock.

I would be inclined not to use the RB30 balancer anyway. Its not really designed for performance or high rpm.

There's a HKS balancer available for around $1500 if any one is interestered. lol

I have never heard of the RB30's having issues with the twin cam balancers so maybe it was just a sohc balancer thing?

RIPS for one has never had any trouble, he's played quite a bit. NOS included.

I swear the HKS fluid dampener is a modified or supplied ATI dampener it looks exactly the same... Fluidampr would make me a dampener in a standar siz ie. ever 1/2 inch from 6-9 inch with the crank land at the size to suit for $1000... THese dapmeners are tested and designed with exacting measurements and manufactured to handle up to 14000RPM, and yes the fluid is there as it is a far better shock absorber!!!

This little link doesn't really go in to much detail but helps explain what is going on with the harmonic balancer.

http://www.secoperformance.com/Tech_Corner_April.htm

Considering the RB25/20/26 Harmonic balancers are designed for highish 7000rpm use is an upgrade needed?

I would probably still think so if the motor is making double or triple the power the balancer was origionally designed around. The shocks would be much greater.

I'm keen to see how Fatz RB30DET goes/lasts as it hangs around drifting with its 7200rpm rev limit.

BUT are the harmonic balancers designed around a certian shock the crank it is designed for? In other words for a long stroke motor do you need a harmonic balancer that is designed a little more heavy duty than a short stroke motor that revs to the same rpm.

HKS definitely = ATI dampers.. :P

http://www.atiperformanceproducts.com/prod...mpers/index.htm

The balancer i used on my twin camer was off the R31 Skyline RB30, it's different to the VL RB30 balancer and different to the 25 one as well as well. But obviously it suits the R31 accessories/pumps so thats what i used.

The R31 unit looks better then the VL unit, but they are probally all as crap as one another, lol.

SOunds alot better than HKS at around the $1500 mark.. Sh1t I think i might get me one of those they are going to be a hell of alot better than anything mass produced I will have to reassess my finances but i think it a good option after all I hope to make around 500rwkw with mine I need all the reassurances i can get when I give it a work out!!!hahaha Thanks Joel for that link!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi. A little bit of an update. It maybe(hope not) looks like i would need a new tranny(it would be "maybe" a cheaper or better option anyway) So i need some info. I know i need a different propshaft(i can make custom one) LSD is not a problem cuz the engine will be still(for now) N/A RB20. So if i buy RB25DET NEO tranny...is there something else i need? I read something about push/pull type but i do not know if i need to "change" something or i can just plug n play onto my engine a go? Thanks for the advice  
    • Good morning all, Bit of a random question but figured I’d finally throw it out after wondering for a long while. Before I start, I'm hoping to do this purely out of personal preference. I think it would look better at night, and don't mind at all spending a few hours and dollars to get it done. I've copied this from a non-Skyline specific forum, so I apologize for the explanation of our headlight switch setup that we all know. Here we go: Zero lights (switch off) Parking lights (switch position 1) being a rectangular marker on the outside of the housing, my low beam being the projector in the centre (position 2), and a high beam triggered by my turn signal stalk. Most North American cars I’ve owned of this era have power to the amber corner (turning indicator) light as part of the first switch (parking lights). I’d love to have these amber corners receive power when the headlights and parking lights are on (headlight switch), yet still blink when using the turn signal which is of course a separate switch. Hopefully I’ve explained my question correctly. Is anyone aware of a way in which I might be able to achieve this? Thanks in advance
    • My heads are cathedral port! It's likely possible, but I don't want to add any extra moving parts (I know they don't move) between the heads, manifolds, etc. It will also affect how injectors/fuel rails etc sit and I don't really know if it would change how the FAST manifold goes/sits/fits. I have the LS6 steam pipes already as I have a very late LS1 block so it should be fine. I couldn't find anyone who had ever actually used one for this purpose, it seems 100% of people grind the water pump. The thermal spacers are 12mm and are half way to the cost of the newer water pump anyhow... so if it comes to that I suppose I'd rather buy a new pump. The bearing in the pump I do have is a little.. clunky, but it hasn't done that much time and I never noticed it when the car was together in the past few years, so..
    • The bushing has failed, not all that uncommon for a car of this age.  Any mechanic should be able to push in a new bushing for you, or you can probably buy the entire lower control arm, complete with bushes.
    • Could you not use "thermal" spacers to give the clearance, like the ones I used between the blower and head? That raised the manifold height by around 10-15mm Albeit the ones I used were for cathedral ports, but I assume they have similar for rectangular ports????
×
×
  • Create New...