Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

G'day guys-

Might be a stupid question but i've never built an inline 6 cylinder engine, and I am looking at replacing the crankshaft only in my RB25DET.

I have tracked down a good condition crank which I would be getting the basic machine work cleanup (polished, crack tested, etc) and then installing myself- but since i'll be reusing the pistons, rods and most other parts besides bearings obviously- is there any balancing that needs to take place, i.e piston and rod weight checking etc.

Cheers all!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/482030-rb25det-crank-balancing/
Share on other sites

If you're going to balance the rotating assembly, then you need to balance the whole rotating assembly.

In an ideal build, you balance the pistons so that they are all the same weight, you balance the rods so that they are all the same and the piston/rod combos are the same. Then you balance the crank with the assumption that the identical piston/rod combo is hanging off of each.

There is no way that you would go to the effort of balancing the crank to suit unmatched piston/rod combos.

By the same token, the are any number of engines that have been slung back together with completely unmatched/unbalanced parts. It's all a matter of what you want to achieve. Bazzilion revs? Balance it. Minimise losses? Balance it? Drive it to the shops below 4000rpm 99% of the time? Save some money (by not spending as much on balancing).

17 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

If you're going to balance the rotating assembly, then you need to balance the whole rotating assembly.

In an ideal build, you balance the pistons so that they are all the same weight, you balance the rods so that they are all the same and the piston/rod combos are the same. Then you balance the crank with the assumption that the identical piston/rod combo is hanging off of each.

There is no way that you would go to the effort of balancing the crank to suit unmatched piston/rod combos.

By the same token, the are any number of engines that have been slung back together with completely unmatched/unbalanced parts. It's all a matter of what you want to achieve. Bazzilion revs? Balance it. Minimise losses? Balance it? Drive it to the shops below 4000rpm 99% of the time? Save some money (by not spending as much on balancing).

Thanks mate- it's only going to be at 450whp at most, and mainly a daily driver- maybe cop a limiter here and there but nothing insane. Thanks for the reply.

3 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I agree, I wouldn't (don't) bother balancing the rotating assembly except for race use. If you are going to do it you should include everything that turns from balancer to clutch

Certainly not a race car (yet, until it decides to fully blow itself) just a daily, around 450whp at the minute. Cheers.

Inline 6s balance out primary and secondary rotation forces so are inherantly well-balanced anyway. Weight matching pistons and rods is a must do i think (many builders go to the extent of weight matching either end of the rod apparantly as well) but for the most part, the crank should be sweet i reckon, i asked all these same questions awhile back. Verifiy bearing clearances as well. Also, ask the machine shop to remove oil gallery plugs and flush the gallerys as well, replacing the oem plugs with screw-in plugs. Just some food for thought...

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

    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
    • Holy hell! That is absolutely stunning! Great work!!!
    • It does when you start adding everything else in. But it's not just compute. It's the logic. Getting your timing right (I'm not meaning ignition timing for the engine). Making sure of your memory mappings, seeing your interrupts. Microcontroller devices only have so much capacity. For the most part, you want all those timers and interrupts in use on your engine control, which means you're left with less than ideal methods for timing and management of other control functions.   Let's put it this way, my job is all about building custom hardware, that goes into cars, and integrates with them. We're also waiting on a media confirmation from SpaceX too fora world first we've just completed with them in NZ too. It's not just the little toys I play with. But you know, you can think and believe what you want.
×
×
  • Create New...