Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balancing


Description: Reverse engineering and the balancing process,….how I do it.

Author: saddlebagrail
Date: Sat May 11, 2013 6:06 pm
Views: 13841
Category: Articles/Miscellaneous Info

Link to article (bb-code [URL]): Copy

[url=https://www.hydra-glide.net/phpBB3/knowledgebase/article?k=65]Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balancing[/url]

Direct link: Copy

https://www.hydra-glide.net/phpBB3/knowledgebase/article?k=65

Comments: 54


Hi Everyone

I was looking for a while for a Harley engine to balance,to show my students and the members here, how to balance a bottom end ,and I was also looking for an engine that was vibrating bad.

Since we took care of the Sidewinder project a few months ago,my students seems to like it a lot when were touching the mechanical stuff like that… and they are also happy when there are different things to learn on the way(for those who did not follow the thread we are talking about the machining process of a S&S sidewinder 93 shovelhead engine).

I also think that it was my turn to show you how I balance a Harley engine,but before starting this story , I had to talk with the owner of the bike.

….He told me that he had the bike for a short period now, but had certainly the time to ride it but trying to keep up with his friends with newer bike like Evo and Twinkie was not an easy task. .

He said that he was riding a lot of his time on highway at a speed of around 70-75 miles per hour trying to keep the pace with his friends, he mentioned to me, that never mind the speed he goes ,they were always in front of him,he simply could not run with them,they were riding too fast ,and his Shovelhead was vibrating like hell break loose at that speed, so he told them all that from now on he would still ride with them, but will probably arrive well after them, no big deal they say as long as you still ride with us……or I would say behind them.

The main reason for this, he was relay feeling «uncomfortable with his ride»,his bike a 76 Shovelhead, assembled from a mismatch of parts from a FX models with a bore of 3 5/8 inch with a stroke of 4 ½ inch ,a 93 engine with S&S flywheels in a STD case.

He told me that his arm was becoming really numb after a short ride(and he mean almost paralized to his shoulder from what he show me,explaining it to me with sign,it seem real bad) and his ride was really showing sign of problems,like the two tank mounting tabs broken as the carburator mounting was also found broken ,without counting the too many parts that became loose on his bike,so to me ,it seem that I found the perfect engine I was looking for,he had a real problem and to show my students how to balance a Harley V-twin engine, why not taking an engine that have a real problem and I offered him to take care of his engine,at first he was not willing due to $,but ask again ,just for the purpose to educate my students around the Harley vibrating myth,… I think it might have help change his mind when I told him I would work for free.

So let the story begin,hope you will enjoy this as my students did….:)

First thing to do , start disassemble those flywheels,by the connecting rods side play I suspect some wear on the crankpin , here in the picture shown the two ½ inch rods that serve to lock the flywheels against the jaws of the vise ,to help taking off the nuts.(I had check the assembly on the lathe between center,dial position on the pinion shaft where rollers runs and near the remaining Timkens before disassembly and runout was less than .001 inch so that was not the problem)

Image
Image

This engine was run with a set of S&S stroker wheel and stock replacement set of connecting rods,it was balanced (static) at some time in the past by the series of hole located inside the the face of both wheels.

Image

When both flywheels were completely disassembled and clean,and ready to be check…
I noticed and write down all informations,a standard process for me when doing an engine.
First picture is the balancing sheet, I use my own custom sheet for that.

Image

You can see what I usually do, I note the models number,flywheels and/or case serial numbers,if the holes are made inside or outside flywheel,where holes are located on each flywheels and also total depth of holes in inches,all that for future reference.

Image


What I decide to do is call a «reverse engineering» to see why this engine was vibrating at first,so I weight everything, from the rotating and reciprocating parts that was installed in that engine, my final calculation end up with a bobweight amount «X» (Bobweight is a counter weight that equal the total weigh of the rotating mass plus a % of the reciprocating mass divide by 2 if you are using the static method)

All you see in the picture are both rotating and reciprocating parts involve.

Image

In this pictures parts that are classified as rotating mass,those would be included in the balancing process ,from crankpin nuts,the locks with screws for the nuts,crankpin with small keys included,all roller bearings with cage,and the lower part of the connecting rods,call also the «Big end»,those rotating parts count 100% in the calculation,divide by 2(for each flywheels) at the end.

Image

Then time to weight the reciprocating mass of the engine,showed in the next two pictures below,those included upper parts of both connecting rods call also the «Small End», the two pistons , wrist pins,all rings,four teflon button in this case ,if using circlips those also need to be included , all those parts are going to be included in the formula,as a % of the total weight call the «balance factor»,we will discuss that matter later.

Image

What I use to balance the rotating and reciprocating parts,is my old Ohaus «Dial-o-grams» precision scale,the degrees of precision is within (.1 grams),and I am always working within .1 grams.

I had an electronic scale before,but this one is long gone,electronic scale was faster to use, but not bullet proof,mechanical type like this one is more rugged…and last a lot longer.

Imageg

First thing to do when doing a reverse engineering is weighting all the parts, write down everything,first start with the rotating portion..crankpin with nuts and the small woodruff key in the shaft and then the 2 locks with screws that serve to secure the 2 crankpin nuts.

Image
Image


Time to weight the two female caged and rollers, and also the male caged and rollers,those are weight individually and I note the total amount on my balancing sheet.

Image

Then it is time to weight both connecting rods«Big End»,here is the special rod support that I made for that purpose,both aluminums bushings were machined for either the «Small End» and «Big End» are installed on really smooth turnning C3 bearings, for less friction, all I have to do is take off the total weight of the platform.(you could see what is supporting the Big End on the scale in the picture,that is what I called the platform)….substracting weight of the platform something that was done faster with the« tare» option on my late electronics scale.

Image

What I have to substract from my equation,is minus 438.5 Grams «G stand for Grams» and «S stand for Small End » of connecting rod and minus 572 grams «G for Grams» and «B for Big end» of connecting rods.

So when weighting a «Big End», I substract 572 grams from the total amount,and when weighting a «Small End», I substract 438.5 grams from the total amount.

All you need to do is taking care to have it perfectly level rods,remember when you are weighting connecting rods,the total of both the Big End and Small End should equal the total weight of the connecting rod itself,to within 6 grams, if it is not within 6 grams,you have to start all over again,weighting the connecting rods is normally what it takes longer.

In this particular case,I end up to within( .6 grams ), ….if you have less than 6 grams at the end of the weighting session ,your ok, all you need to included in the calculation is 2/3 of the remaining weight and add/substract it to the rotating mass and the 1/3 remaining on the reciprocating mass,

In my case so (.4 grams was add on the rotating) and (.2 grams was add on the reciprocating mass) for a total of (.6 grams).

Supporting the «Big End» for weighting the «Small End»,making sure both center are at the same height.

Image
Image


Part of the reciprocating «Small End » connecting rod

Both pistons with rings and wrist pins need to be included in the formula for the weithing session,I did not take off rings and wrist pin for this,user still want to run same set of rings,the top end was done last years with barely noticiable wear ,so why taking chances taking off those rings,I am not a big fan of using the same rings,but in this case customer want to save some dollars.

Image

To finish time to weight the reciprocating mass, the small teflon buttons that serve to secure the wrist pin instead of circlips.

Image

Here is my final calculations, I will find out at what % of balance factor this engine was done at first,this is what I call the reverse engineering,it will show you why this engine was vibrating like hell.

Image

I end up with 1279.7 grams on each flywheels and at 60% balance factor,(balance factor is a % of the total reciprocating weight in the calculation) and the rotating weight is included as 100% in the calculation,

In this case I use 60% balance factor as all of my balancing job,some prefer 50% (like pre 73 Harley engine) as all were balance from MoCo,some use 55% for heavy flywheels,some prefer 58%,some 59%,but a good rule of thumb is 60% balance factor,I balance my own 67 Generator Shovel with a 60% balance factor and I am feeling «really and I mean really comfortable» with it,and those are among the heaviest wheel you can find on a Harley…

There is a lot of arguying about the «balance factor»,normally all Harley engine need to be balance from a certain balance factor located between 50% to almost 70%,always depending on the set up you have,early engine were balance to 50% ,with a average bobweight for all of them ,some were worst bone shaker than other,but remember if you use same bobweight for all engines you might end up with at least some slight variation in all,ending up with some that will show more vibration than other,needless to say .

Those (pre 73 ) engine was also ridden at a slower speed than what we ride nowadays, MoCo were using a lower balance factor to make a more equal balancing ride from the vertical and horizontal plane,then decide to change that balance factor in 1973 to a higher percentage at 60%.

The higher you go on your balance factor % ,the more you move the unbalance plane to an horinzontal one ,horizontal plane make it more comfortable as your bike run in an horizontal motion , you cannot go higher than 60 % on Big twins,or the vibration will simply get worst on the horizontal plane,so it is safe to say, nothing under 50% and nothing over 60% for big twin engine .

You could go higher with your balance factor like for example for newer Evo Sportster, those could be as high as 69%,again different engine set up ,and if you look at the rubber mount engine they seem to perform a lot better at around 54%.... remember here that whatever the factor you are using, you will only move the annoying unbalance feeling of your own motorcycle to another RPM or speed,…it is only a «compromise» when talking about balancing a Harley engine,you will never achieve a perfectly balance engine with a 45 degrees set up….again it is only a «compromise» to a certain speed and RPM range that you normally ride most of the time….and that speed is normally located between 55 and 75 miles and hour,below or higher that speed you will encounter some slight vibrations,probably the reason why Harley came up some rubber mount handlebar and floorboard to try get rid of the numb feeling rider’s were complaining about,also probably to compete with the motorcycle import from Japan and Europe,other parts that might be taken in consideration when talking about vibrations on a Harley ,is the motor support,clutch hub,tires and wheels bearings to name a few,those parts could lend to the same result as unblance flywheels,maybe not as worst but still quite annoying.

An engine that has been balance with great care using the static method, is to my opinion as close as you can get it,dynamically balance engine is done faster ,when everything is set and ready, but the method is not necessarly better,remember the «compromise»in balancing a 45 degrees Harley engine.

Rule of thumb if the component to be balance is no more than 4 inch wide, it could be balance on a single plane,and if wider than that, it is recommended to use the dynamic method,this method could balance double or multiple plane at the same time,since each Harley wheel are not that wide they could be balance with the static method with success.

Those using the dynamic method ,have to align and true both wheels with or without connecting rods mount on the assembly (depending on the type of balancing machine they are using), then need to drill the holes on the outside face of wheels,this method have a tendency to hold much oil on the outside face of rims and that oil cannot escape easily,due to the close gap between wheels and crankcase,oil equal weigth,if this oil cannot get out easily,this will result in an unbalance engine….also that oil will have a tendency to form bubble and foam more when force to escape via a tight space,thought that oil cannot do it’s job well,were talking about cooling and lubricate,oil will be affect,….again it is my opinion.

Normally I do not included oil in my balancing formula but some do (amount of oil count as weight in some balancing formula),it is hard to figure out how much oil will count in the balancing as every engine is different from volume and or scavenging the oil in the crankcase.

For those who want to see what a complete bobweight assembly for a dynamic balancing job, it looks like the one shown here, this kit is one that is custom made but could also be buy from special supplier.

Image

Let continue with the story, here is my personal static balancing stand , I use for balancing a Harley flywheel, it is a custom stand made for that specific purposes, as all the special tooling I use in this thread.

Image
Image
Image



Most people who balance either in shop or at home still use the knife edge stand, like those sold by S&S, shown here is my very first balancing stand look like an S&S stand, with slight improvement ,I now prefer to use my newer one, a little more precise using big roller wheels with C3 bearing without oil to reduce friction, really take not that much to make it turn.

Those knife edge are cheaper to build as a manufacturer’s point of view and still do the job no problem,as long as they are perfectly level,in this case a center bolt and 4 jack screws in each corner to make it easy to level.

Image

And for those who are looking to build one for their own purpose, another stand type that could be build at home without too much equipement,this one I made in the past to balance grinding wheels ,quite similar to the knife edge except for the two round rods ,bolted on top of the knife edge,those are bolt-on and could be change if damaged.

Image

Back to the balancing process,after all my calculation was done and the bobweight installed on the flywheel ,I noticed a strong movement,the bobweigth drop suddenly to the bottom (remember mother earth gravity attraction),meaning I was really off balance ,so I start taking off some weight out of the bobweight,a little at a time,and this is what I took off,and then the wheels were not moving at all,meaning they were in perfect balance,wherever you stop each wheels they doesn’t move,so I weight the remaining bobweigth to see at what % balance factor that particular engine was balance at first«called the reverse engineering»,see my calculation below.

Image
Image


To obtain the 60% factor I was looking for at first and to show you how much weight need to be add on the opposite side I simply use «Mactac blue adhesive» that serve to hold thing on the wall.

Image

I use small metal plugs of ½ inch in diameter as it is the same size of the hole that was drilled in before.

Image

Noticed the position of the plugs versus the previously drilled holes,I tried to match the length of holes with similar plugs on the opposite side and the wheels are now very close to balance…at 60% factor,so what happened for that specific engine? Was there any change in connecting rods and or pistons in the past for exemple? Why those wheels were so off balance ? I guess we would probably never know but we will correct the problem….

Image

This is basically what need to be add to both flywheels to have them balance to 60% balance factor,they were off by 88.9 grams or slightly over 3 onces (each) if you prefer, at that diameter it make a whole lot difference,from a very unbalance engine to a smooth running engine,

To give you an idea, just imagine if you put the total amount we just found ,multiply by two for both wheels 179.8 grams in a small bag and turn it in a very short circular motion ,at the highest speed you could ,it would give you an idea of what I mean by very unbalance,….and remember your not turning at the normal speed of an engine.

Image

But wait ! That’s not all about this engine….the reciprocating weight difference between both front and rear connecting rods should be very close to each other to have an engine that run smoother,and in this case there was a 19.7 grams difference, reciprocating weight was heavier on the front cylinder,this will end up with an engine that would be unbalance,cause both reciprocating was not equal to each others,some will neglict this portion as they say, those specific engine run on a single crankpin so you don’t have to bother about that,I do not agree with them.

Remember that every time the engine make a complete turn , if one piston assembly is heavier than the other, even if they are on the same rotating assembly,this piston assembly will create an unbalance movement as the speed of the engine goes up, more on one cylinder than the other, that will allow a noticiable vibration,you would not be able to tell from front or rear which one is the heaviest assembly,but you would still be able to feel some annoying vibration with an engine that is suppose to be balance,… but without equalizing the reciprocating assembly.

It take more time and special care to equalize both reciprocating weight,who would be willing to pay the extra difference to have it done like that ?

In every engine combination with multiple cylinders ,all reciprocating parts should be as close to each other as possible,and also as light as possible…not only the balance factor is important ,the closer the reciprocating weight from both the front and rear assembly ,the better you will enjoy your ride at the end,in this case a difference of 19.7 gramms with the old rods.

Image


Let’s continue with the flywheels,those holes that were previouly drilled ,now most need to be plug ,maybe not all of them,but a large part.

I am still looking to achieve what I was running for at first ,an engine with a 60% balance factor.

Those holes were drill ½ inch in size( I normally drill them 7/16 inch so I could plug them if needed to ½-20 NF thread that is common size bolt),this time I will have to use either the M14 x 1.25 bolts or 9/16-NF bolts,the only bolt I have on hands is the 9/16 NF so here we go, tapping them all with 9/16-NF thread then we will take care of the rest after.

Image
Image


Both wheel are ready for the final touch,already tap and ready to be plug with portion of bolts,don’t forget when doing that,always use a good cleaning agent ,use primer and Loctite to make sure those threaded bolts portion will never come off.

Image
Image


If for example the weight of those steel bolts were not enough to counterbalance the bobweight you can use Tungstene often call «mallory metal» the density of Tungstene is much more than regular metal or cast.

Even if I don’t need all that extra weight in my own flywheels ,I will try to explain to you,how you proceed to correct the problem, with a solid carbide end mill (you can also buy some mallory tungstene metal from special supplier), this one I cut to length with an abrasive wheel,you press this slug in, then you need to plug the top part of the hole ,to make sure this tungtene slug will never come off or get loose,you will take a small threaded portion out of a 9/16 NF bolt, to thread on top of the plug ,cut and face the rim on the lathe or simply grind the rest, this way I will have a heavy plug that will counter balance and it will never come off .

Machining on the lathe instead of grinding the face of the flywheel make a much more cleaner job.

Image
Image
Image


Remember to clean everything correctly then prime and loctite the bolt in place before using the hacksaw to cut them,you can see that the location of the drilled hole are not in a perfect symetry,some of them are closer to the inside of the rim and some from the outside,I will take care of that matter later.

Image


Time to continue with the balancing process,since connecting rods bearings and crankpin were worn out,I ask my indy to bring me new quality sets.

I just receive a new set of connecting rods to replace the old set that was worn on the loose side with new one,made in Japan replacement sets,I told him to either bring me a set of american or japanese rods assembly,I do not like those made in Taiwan or in China.

I know some would take the time to resize/lapping the male and female Big End and fit oversize rollers,change the crankpin and nuts,put some new bronze bushing on the reciprocating end and hone them,a lot of work and most of the time not worth it,considering those were fit (real nice fit by the way) with all new material,cost 240 dollars plus tax,if you buy parts separatly with time you spend doing the reconditioning,it would probably cost a lot more than that,unless you have OEM or quality aftermarket and want to stick with it.

Those previous rods were replacement also and the purpose of this article was to explain how balancing is done,not fitting rollers bearings in a Big end assembly.

Image


Same replacement part number but brand new,will save me a lot of work,just have to complete the balancing job…….but probably a bit more work to come as you all know.

Image
Image


Time to take care of those new rods,to included all those parts in my new specs sheet,I have to put everything in small ziplock bag,always taking care not to touch clean rollers with bare hands,all roller bearings and bearing should not be touch with bare hands,the reason for this is acidity coming from your hands that would create microscopic rusty print that will end up with rust on surface,all major bearing companies has been doing a lot of research about this matter and they found that high speed rollers bearings touched with bare hands ,turning at high speed will show microscopics sparks occuring at those exact spots they were touch previously,causing premature wear,so don’t touch roller bearings or whatever kind of bearings with bare hands and if you decide to do it make sure you have oil on your hands before touching them or sometimes when I am too lazy to pick some latex glove, I clean my hands with brake cleaner ,brake cleaner make my hands white and also very clean ,not the way to go but sure get clean hands,… it is always better to use latex glove,also another thing,keep those rollers away from humidity,it is very important,to prevent surface rust .

Image


All roller bearings male and female stock in small separate Ziplock bags,ready to be weight.

Image
Image


Before weighting each bag of rollers,there is another thing to take care,empty bag still weigh something,in this case 1.9 grams that need to be substract from total weight of each bags.

Image


After all small bags have been weight, time to take care of both connecting rods,from the « female Big end» and the« female Small end» and then to the «male Big end» and the «male Small end».

Image
Image
Image
Image

The only missing parts are pistons,rings, wrist pins and the 4 teflon buttons,those total weight would not change from the first weighting session,cause we will use them again , those new reciprocating part(connecting rods) will have to be weight again and would be recalculate.

Remember when I mentioned that both reciprocating weight was important,after weighting both front and rear reciprocating weight ,I found a difference of 16.2 grams, heavier this time on the front cylinder compare to 19.7 gramms with the old rods.

Image


So what need to be done is call equalizing reciprocating weight,either from piston or small end of connecting rod or from both.

Image


Why I decide to take the weigth of the connecting rod end instead of the piston,if customer want to change piston in the futureto similar he will not change the end result by much and also connecting rods are there for a longer period of time ,first thing to do when doing job like that is planning where you want to take off the material without weakening the rod itself.

Image


The grinding session took me about an hour in all, grinding and weighting the male small end (you don’t want to take off too much) , I end up within ( .2 grams) difference between front and rear reciprocating weight,that was close enough for me.

Here a few pics of the process from the start to final touch up.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image


Now that both reciprocating ends are within (.2 grams difference),it is the time to prepare for the proper bobweight assembly.

Image

Time to take my spec sheets out,to do the balancing with the new parts,check and install correct bobweight on flywheel,1272.16 grams for bobweigt on each wheels,small paper sheet on top to have the perfect bobweight for my application.


Image

In theory this is what need to be add to achieve correct balancing,not dead on , but close to that,those 3 sections were screwed in a little.

Image
Image


Cut a slot on the face of each threads, to make it possible to screw them with a screwdriver,this is just to explain how the balancing is done,those need to be taken off again,clean properly,prime and loctite in place,then the section that is protruding need to be machine flush and final balancing could be achieve,by drilling some very light spot at the end.

To show you how close it will be before finishing the balancing ,I just add 1 little threaded portion on the opposite(end of my finger) equal the total length of the 3 protruding portion of bolts and after I add that little portion of thread bolt the flywheel was stopping everywhere without moving too much,those pictures are just to explain how to proceed,probably some small touch up hole need to be done to achieve perfect balancing.

Image

Then time to take care of the final plug-in of those holes,both parts need to be clean correctly with brake or contact cleaner,then prime both parts with 7649 loctite,then some Red Loctite high strenght inside the threaded portion in the flywheels.

Image
Image

When all bolts section have been threaded in ,your ready to mount both flywheels on the lathe to machine the face,that make a clean finish.

Image


At the same time I had the flywheel on the lathe I always take care of doing a circular line on the center of the protruding portion of the flywheel,this way you will end up with a symetric series of holes for your next balancing job.

Image

Here is what the plugged holes looks like after the machining on the lathe,see the black spot(it is cured Red loctite) inside one hole,…it is the threaded plug portion from the hole that is the closest,normally you should leave at least 1/8 inch between each hole on forged wheel and ¼ inch between each hole on cast wheels,as you can see symetry also was not taken care of,those rules were not respected,poor balancing job to me.

Image
Image

Now it is time to mount both flywheels on the balancing stand for the final touch up,should be very close for sure but still some fine tuning needed to finish both wheels,just to give you an idea again of what need to be drill to achieve perfect balance I took a small 9/16 NF threaded bolt about 5/16 in length for one flywheel and about 1/8 in long for the other flywheel on the opposite side ,and both wheels were not moving at all anywhere you stop them,see the «X in black» that need to be drill and on opposite small length of bolt to compensate for the hole that is not drill yet.

Image
Image

At the time of mounting bobweight for final balancing I noticed wear on the inside face of both flywheels,actually around where crankpin is mounted, another thing to take care before finishing the balancing process,so I order a set of steel trust washer(from early model) and will fit them on, one for each flywheel to make them as new again,on S&S wheel there is no connecting rod trust washer,the wheel are forged steel and normally doesn’t wear out fast,this set must have some mileage.

Image
Image
Image


Flywheels mounted on the CNC mill and dial.

Image


Using circular interpolation on the cnc mill make perfect grooves to adapt those news hardened trust washers.

Need to put some coolant to do the machining, first picture was made with only a air pressure hose but end up with broken end mill.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Will now take care of the final balancing ,and the balancing would be as close as you can have a Harley engine running,the owner will then be able to keep the rhythm and ride with his friends on their newer bikes,without being severely shaken.

Shown is the final balancing ,you can see what need to be drill on each flywheel to have both in perfect balance.,both wheels are balance to within .1 grams with this static method.

The balancing stand I use in this thread has been try with a small dab of mactac weighting( .1 grams ) and wheel was moving….accurate enough for any person doing a balancing job on a Harley engine.

Image
Image
Image


Here is my final balancing sheets for future reference….and also for those who are curious.

Image

Now time to reassemble those flywheels as a complete assembly,need to see torque specs from S&S,left is with stock shaft and right is with S&S shaft,I use a Jims pinion and the OEM sprocket shaft.

Image

To do this,I am using the shop table with 2 holes drill through it to accept 2 mounting bolts and a slot to clear both shafts,very solid and easy to do for anyone.

Image
Image
Image


Time to check each wheel for concentricity on the outside and on the the side,all with in .001 inch,now ready to finish the assembly.

Image

That is what you need to complete.

Image

Torco assembly lube is a must for any engine .

Image
Image

Slide both connecting rods over the bearings assembly

Image


After mounting the flywheels on the lathe both wheels were off by .005 inch with torque at 175 ,missing only 35 pounds to get it finish,note the 2 rods that are secure with vise grip,they were machine to slide with slight drag ,that way flywheels are set up quicker.

Image


Final assembly runs within specs at .0000 inch on sprocket shaft and at .0002 inch on pinion shaft.

Image

Another problem occurs before closing the case,since the previous assembly was so unbalance,the inner portion of the pinion race end up with a total out of round of .0035 inch so nothing I can do ,I need to put a new race in and then line lap.

Another special tool to press the old pinion race bushing

Image


But surprise the race do not need to be press out,only finger pressure will do,I guess another problem coming…

Image
Image


Bushing .001 under the bore size,only set screws was securing the race….but set screws were not tight,I mean not touching the harden race too much,so I order an oversize race and we will fit this new race.

Guess what another problem ,when mounting the new oversize Eastern made race on a custom aluminum mandrel,I found out the race was not concentric ,interior was perfect but outside was off by .0025 inch,so if I had measure the race and order the one next in size to fit as a shrink fit in the bore I would have a big surprise…hard to lap something that is not in centerline with the opposite Timkens bearings….I would assume the interior and exterior was concentric,but it was not,some quality control problems from most North American companies nowadays ,quality is not was is used to be.

The outside race was at 1.135(I think it was a .005 OS,I asked for at least .005 inch or more, I was expected to machine the outside to make it fit anyway) so I had enough material to remove to have the fit I was looking for at 1.1295 for a bore size of 1.127(.0025 inch as a shrink fit)

Image

Ready to be cut with the ceramic insert.

Image
Image


Time to heat the case and shrink the pinion race.

Image

I use snow to freeze the race (get to 1.129 so .0005 inch down)

Image
Image
Image

Time to lap the race,I use the old Timken in their respectice race with the pilot from my lapping tool,and then lap the new race to final size at 1.7515 (starting from 1.749 inch on each end and 1.7485 in the middle after the shrink fit) ,the new pinion shaft from Jims is at 1.7502 inch so I ordered a set of .0002 os rollers at .2502 inch to have a .0009 inch tolerance.

Image


Almost done with this engine,my indy ask me if I could check the Timkens play for him since he did not have the tools to check it,well I said yes it is a small job when you have the proper tool,but guess what, total backlash from brand new Timkens kit was at .009 inch,way too much ,Harley recommmended between .001 to .006 max,so I took the small spacer to the surface grinder and take .006 inch off of it to end up at .100 instead of .106 inch, I end up at .0017 backlash, that is a nice backlash for a set up like that.

Image
Image
Image
Image


As you can see the total backlash is now at .0017 inch a lot better than the .009 inch we had at first,again never assume even if the company is Timkens.

Image


This is time to call my indy telling him that he could come and pick up this project,the rest will be complete by him with a few phone call to me in the meantime….

I stop at the shop and took a couple more pictures of the flywheels now assemble in the crankcase,getting closer …

Image
Image


Things I forgot to mentioned,I drill a ¼-20 nc set screw to reduce the flow to the connecting rods,drill I use is a 3/32 inch,I might have drill a little smaller but at .093 inch I would be safe ,the Jims shaft come with a threaded hole of ¼-20 without any plug or reducer in the box,so the hole was at over .200 inch ,too big for a pinion hole,the pump need to build pressure.

Image

I am sure some of you might have other method to do a balancing job,and some might disagree with the way I am doing things ,and I fully respect that,remember here my main goal was to show my students how a Harley bottom end was balance,I have had a few more to thing to take care along the way,more than first expected for sure, but it is part of life,you live and you learn, I expect some of you might have learn something from this also .

Hope you have enjoy this very long thread ,(saddlebagrail)
Comments
George Greer, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:33 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray,,

Always impressed by your work.

Side note, got the spacer for the transmission.

George
Cotten, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 2:21 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray!

Here's my rod tops:
RODTOPS.jpg
Please explain why one must to be shaved down to a toothpick to be equal to the other.

Thanks in advance.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 2:34 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:Ray!

Here's my rod tops:
RODTOPS.jpg
Please explain why one must to be shaved down to a toothpick to be equal to the other.

Thanks in advance.

....Cotten
Why I need to explain that?
Cotten, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 12:31 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
saddlebagrail wrote: Why I need to explain that?
Sorry, you gave the impression that you were a teacher.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 1:27 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:
saddlebagrail wrote: Why I need to explain that?
Sorry, you gave the impression that you were a teacher.

....Cotten

Hi

My everyday job is actually a machinist instructor,just to make thing clear.

....wondering if you did weight the end of both your connecting rods ? your using «toothpick» term still don't know why....if you take material off the end without touching the stress area of the end rods you are fine,the engine mentioned in my balancing thread is a 93 inch Shovelhead and owner have «REALLY» test the bike since :mrgreen:,I had no worries whatsover when I did the job ,metal taken out, was taken where it could not affect the integrity of the rod itself.

From what I can understand you never equalize any small end rods before,don't know if you did a balancing job as a step by step with pictures like I did,if you did so, please send me the link,I would gladly read it.
If you never did one might be a good idea to create a complete thread just like I did, so everyone could see other options and ideas,I am always open to learn new things,we all know that no one do their thing similar.

Any automotive builder equalize rods in every balance job they do,just make sure you do not take off too much material in the stress area ,Ray
Cotten, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 3:19 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray!

I am well aware of the need for autos to have their rods "equalized", as I performed my share (although upon a dynamic balancer, instead of static of course).

Autos have multiple crank throws.

V-twins have only one crank throw.

There is only one reciprocating weight in the balancing formula: the total.

Even if you could provide some grounds for equibrating the weight between cylinders, why on earth would you not lighten the more temporary piston, instead of making the rod more temporary?

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 3:46 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:Ray!



There is only one reciprocating weight in the balancing formula: the total.

Even if you could provide some grounds for equibrating the weight between cylinders, why on earth would you not lighten the more temporary piston, instead of making the rod more temporary?

....Cotten
There is one reciprocating weight in the formula,the total,.......BUT moving in different directions, thus creating a small unbalance......

Rods are in the engine for a lot longer period....... than pistons......
Cotten, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 5:42 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
saddlebagrail wrote:...There is one reciprocating weight in the formula,the total,.......BUT moving in different directions, thus creating a small unbalance......
Ray!

The word "unbalance" is inappropriate.
The force X mass events that you refer to are called "moments"
The motor only has one "balance" and that is what you choose to make it.

One could just as easily declare that the front should be heavier, as it fires second in a very uneven interval that also disrupts the flow of fuel, making leaner (so it has been said...) or arguments could be made to make it lighter yet. (Combustion is accounted for in motor balancing; That's why it gets lumpy when one cylinder quits.)
Either way, it is just conjuring, because there is only one crankpin.
saddlebagrail wrote:Rods are in the engine for a lot longer period....... than pistons......
My point exactly.
If you are going to compromise the integrity of a part, it might as well be one that will get changed out anyway.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 11:28 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:
saddlebagrail wrote:...There is one reciprocating weight in the formula,the total,.......BUT moving in different directions, thus creating a small unbalance......
Ray!

The word "unbalance" is inappropriate.
The force X mass events that you refer to are called "moments"
The motor only has one "balance" and that is what you choose to make it.

One could just as easily declare that the front should be heavier, as it fires second in a very uneven interval that also disrupts the flow of fuel, making leaner (so it has been said...) or arguments could be made to make it lighter yet. (Combustion is accounted for in motor balancing; That's why it gets lumpy when one cylinder quits.)
Either way, it is just conjuring, because there is only one crankpin.
saddlebagrail wrote:Rods are in the engine for a lot longer period....... than pistons......
My point exactly.
If you are going to compromise the integrity of a part, it might as well be one that will get changed out anyway.

....Cotten
Cotten

Sorry for the term «unbalance»,my main language is «french» and I try very hard to express my self the best possible ways in english sorry for that but I think everyone could excuse me for that.....maybe next time I will post in french...


I think it is really time that you post a complete thread like this so we can all see what you are capable of,I have the guts to express myself as a new member with this complete story and you try to find some excuse that I did something wrong,might be the case so what ,you live and you learn and as long as I could help others here I am fine with that.

When you are talking integrity of the rod,the great motorcycle legend late « Phil Irving» is telling how to take care of that matter in his excellent books,he should know how to do that ,do you agree?You should know him I assume?..... and now you are going to tell me that I did something wrong with my rod end,if it was the case then the engine would have exploded by now...by the way the last engine I «balance» I only change the wrist pin to have a lighter one to equalize,is this fine in this case ? :mrgreen: .

You could have taken weight off the piston,it is still an option, why I decide to take material off the rod, is when you change piston with same type you would not have to dissassemble and rebalance due to very close weight between newer pistons set and old standard ones, even if you go oversize by .060, would still be very close to the std size in weight,bottom end last way much longer and instead of taken material off piston when you are doing a top end next time ,it would be easier,just check their respective weight,install them and you are good to go.

Another thing might be a good idea to let the other here express themselves instead of trying to always have the last words,I know some knows more than others ,I think that you are in that corner ,still waiting to read from you MR.Cotten,but not in a «virtual» thing, but real world, with clean pictures explaining how you do your own things, :mrgreen:

I know now why the « "lifestylers" were giving you trouble,I never had problem with them ,kinda funny :D
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray!

It would be pointless to write a long diatribe on my equipment and methods, when we disagree on basic theory.

I accept Herr Elvenkemper's explanation in the Virtual Indian discussion (http://virtualindian.org/Flywheeltheory.htm, near the bottom of the page.): Half of a heavy rod will always be heavier than half of a light rod. Part of the bottom of the rod is reciprocating weight, too.

The motor could care less.
Many motors have proven to run fine even with different bore sizes and piston weights.
The notion that the top of the female rod must be decimated is just another example of the superstition and hype that surrounds motor balancing.

.....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 4:33 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:Ray!

It would be pointless to write a long diatribe on my equipment and methods, when we disagree on basic theory.

I accept Herr Elvenkemper's explanation in the Virtual Indian discussion (http://virtualindian.org/Flywheeltheory.htm, near the bottom of the page.): Half of a heavy rod will always be heavier than half of a light rod. Part of the bottom of the rod is reciprocating weight, too.

The motor could care less.
Many motors have proven to run fine even with different bore sizes and piston weights.
The notion that the top of the female rod must be decimated is just another example of the superstition and hype that surrounds motor balancing.

.....Cotten
Cotton


Cotton

Since you know it all,could you explain why if you do 2 exact similar Harley Big Twin engines using the same frame,the first one «with» equalizing the reciprocating weight on both front and rear and the other one «without» equalizing the reciiprocating weight on both cylinders front and rear,you end up wiht not the same results,and I mean smoother when reciprocating weight was equalized,

From what I have read from you should have done quite a lot of engines and should have tested both methods? so IF you have done both method why the difference? Is it possible that you could show us something with clear explanation and PICTURES to prove your point.

....by the way I have done both ways and prefer to equalized both reciprocating than the normal method.

One more thing why you are reffering to Herr Elvenkemper's and not on you ?,is that you never try it and relied on others .... :mrgreen: ....

I have tried and tested both and I COULD TELL not from others just like you mentioned,.....that it is in reality not «virtual»... but in reality that the engine feel smoother from your pants on the driver seat,Ray
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray!

I refer to Matt E. because it was his contribution, not mine. He straightened me out on this confusion, and perhaps you should take the time to read it.

Motor balancing does not address the rider's comfort.
Motor balancing only addresses the internal forces within the motor, as contained by the frame.

The rider may feel resonances no doubt, and that too was discussed in the VI webmagazine article. They are incidental, and far less felt than common drivetrain issues and other chassis concerns.

H-Ds in stock frames do in fact run smoothly over a wide range of factor, without decimating the female rod.
And they always have, when everything else is in order.
If you've got shakes, somethings out of order.

What your example scenario means to me is that some problem came out in the wash of the rebuild and the chassis repairs, not just your tampering with the poor female rod.

If you want an anecdote to chew on,
My 84" that dropped a valve head through a piston, after a zillion miles, suffered not a bit with one .050" low compression piston in one cylinder, and a .070" std compression piston in the other.
Subjectively to me,.. it seemed smoother, with a tad more power of course!
Yet by your fearful theory, it should have torn itself apart.

Why did it not?

....Cotten
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 9:37 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
If I may in the meantime, Folks,

Please allow me to explain my position on mutilating the female rod top.

Imagine these rod tops sawn off. One is a male rod, the other its mate.
RODTOPS.jpg
It is obvious that their masses would be nearly the same.
These are the major portions of the rods which travel in different directions.

The hanging method of determining mass of rod tops, however, includes mass from the bottoms of the rods.
That's why we hang them: Some of the bottoms are moving up and down, thus reciprocating mass, but not traveling divergently, like the tops.

The huge female rod will alway have a heavier top than the male, unless you carve it to an extreme, pointlessly attempting to make the bottoms equal by altering the tops.

Now imagine Ray's rod tops sawn off.
The hardware that actually travels in different directions is now dramatically un-equal.

How ironic that in search of a mythical ideal of equality, the rods should be contrived to be different.
One can only wonder how it affects its rigidity, etc.

But since the inherent design of the motor can absorb it,
it is much a do about nothing!

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:Ray!

I refer to Matt E. because it was his contribution, not mine. He straightened me out on this confusion, and perhaps you should take the time to read it.

Motor balancing does not address the rider's comfort.
Motor balancing only addresses the internal forces within the motor, as contained by the frame.

The rider may feel resonances no doubt, and that too was discussed in the VI webmagazine article. They are incidental, and far less felt than common drivetrain issues and other chassis concerns.

H-Ds in stock frames do in fact run smoothly over a wide range of factor, without decimating the female rod.
And they always have, when everything else is in order.
If you've got shakes, somethings out of order.

What your example scenario means to me is that some problem came out in the wash of the rebuild and the chassis repairs, not just your tampering with the poor female rod.

If you want an anecdote to chew on,
My 84" that dropped a valve head through a piston, after a zillion miles, suffered not a bit with one .050" low compression piston in one cylinder, and a .070" std compression piston in the other.
Subjectively to me,.. it seemed smoother, with a tad more power of course!
Yet by your fearful theory, it should have torn itself apart.

Why did it not?

....Cotten

Motor balancing does not address the rider's comfort.
Motor balancing only addresses the internal forces within the motor, as contained by the frame.

I have to agree here that main purpose to carefully balance an engine is to have your internal parts last longer to keep internal wear to a minimum,BUT rider will have a smooth running engine, and that is going to happen at the same time and engine is balance carefully.


The rider may feel resonances no doubt, and that too was discussed in the VI webmagazine article. They are incidental, and far less felt than common drivetrain issues and other chassis concerns.

H-Ds in stock frames do in fact run smoothly over a wide range of factor, without decimating the female rod.
And they always have, when everything else is in order.
If you've got shakes, somethings out of order.
Decimating a female rod  remember my thread taking the balance factor from 50% to 60% ,from a really bad( shake the hell out of it motor) to a very smoooootttth running internal parts ,ending up with a real pleasure to drive with that S&S strocker…

What your example scenario means to me is that some problem came out in the wash of the rebuild and the chassis repairs, not just your tampering with the poor female rod.
Actually the only thing that was done to that specific engine was a careful balance job,oups I forgot an a change in the intermediate jet in the carb and a cam and valve springs.


If you want an anecdote to chew on,
My 84" that dropped a valve head through a piston, after a zillion miles, suffered not a bit with one .050" low compression piston in one cylinder, and a .070" std compression piston in the other.
Subjectively to me,.. it seemed smoother, with a tad more power of course!
Yet by your fearful theory, it should have torn itself apart.

Why did it not?
The difference in weight between the .050 low compresssion piston and the .070 std compression piston,combustion chambers were a bit different,BUT reciprocting weight was then real close to each other reason why you feel the smoothness……
In reality it is not a «fearful theory» as you mentioned,If you do it like I did ,or if you don’t ,nothing will exploded or torn apart,I did not mentioned anything like that and I want to make things clear for the members here that will read this.
I still prefer to do it the way I do, even if it takes more times,I know that it really make a difference at the end,cause I have tested both method,I am not here to make you change your mind,something that everybody here knows that is impossible ,but to make thing clear for those who will read this ,so they could better understand how things work inside their engine.

IF you ever balance a car engine or even an Harley engine and you never touch a connecting rods, then I would say that your not a professionnal in what you do,ANY engine builder would tell you to equalize rods and also reciprocating weight,it is the basic of all professionnal job.
Still don,t know why I keep replying to someone who cannot make a complete thread explaining how he is doing his thing,you have you idea and that fine,but why arguying anything that is post on this site…all that without posting anything interesting by yourself but «bitching»agaisnt someone that REALLY TAKES THE TIME AND EFFORT TO EDUCATE THE MEMBERS HERE……...
You know what, I have had some students like you in the past and they never end up being some top notch machinist due to their attitude of know it all,…. I thing this is why you cannot post elsewhere than here,sorry but I had to say it ……Ray
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 11:12 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:If I may in the meantime, Folks,

Please allow me to explain my position on mutilating the female rod top.

Imagine these rod tops sawn off. One is a male rod, the other its mate.
It is obvious that their masses would be nearly the same.
These are the major portions of the rods which travel in different directions.

The hanging method of determining mass of rod tops, however, includes mass from the bottoms of the rods.
That's why we hang them: Some of the bottoms are moving up and down, thus reciprocating mass, but not traveling divergently, like the tops.

The huge female rod will alway have a heavier top than the male, unless you carve it to an extreme, pointlessly attempting to make the bottoms equal by altering the tops.

Now imagine Ray's rod tops sawn off.
The hardware that actually travels in different directions is now dramatically un-equal.

How ironic that in search of a mythical ideal of equality, the rods should be contrived to be different.
One can only wonder how it affects its rigidity, etc.

But since the inherent design of the motor can absorb it,
it is much a do about nothing!

....Cotten
Jealousy can be that bad,I have to agree yes :mrgreen: ,more please I want more :mrgreen: ,why keep arguying your idea is set on a thing, and I have mind,I will not make you change your mind and I really don't want to ,please would you do me a favor ,TAKE THE TIMES TO REALLY POST SOME REAL TECH THREADS WITH PICTURES INSTEAD.....
1950EL, Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 5:56 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
I do not have the knowledge, education, training, or experience to validate (or even completely understand) either of the differing opinions here. I enjoyed reading the original post and felt a little more informed after doing so and seeing the photos. I will never be doing this but I have a better understanding of one man's way of doing it and I thank you for that. I also appreciate knowing that this is not necessarily the only way to do it. I thank you both for taking the time and trouble.
Mike
saddlebagrail, Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 9:29 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
1950EL wrote:I do not have the knowledge, education, training, or experience to validate (or even completely understand) either of the differing opinions here. I enjoyed reading the original post and felt a little more informed after doing so and seeing the photos. I will never be doing this but I have a better understanding of one man's way of doing it and I thank you for that. I also appreciate knowing that this is not necessarily the only way to do it. I thank you both for taking the time and trouble.
Mike
Your Welcome Mike

For sure it might not be for everyone, but at least now you know the basic on how parts works together inside of your engine ,it is a plus for you,and if you want to try it by yourself sometimes in the future, then you will have all the basics.

There is other ways of making it, everyone have different opinions on this subject,my goal was to educate those, like you who never completly understand the Harley balancing thing,with a complete story like I just did, with clear explanations and pictures it is way easier to understand,I thank you for taking the time to post your feeling about the original thread.

....For the time and trouble I guess I have the large parts of the cake here :mrgreen:

Ray
ingram, Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 12:25 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Great article and fantastic pictures. :!: :!: :!:

Thanks for sharing Ray.
saddlebagrail, Posted: Fri May 17, 2013 2:09 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
ingram wrote:Great article and fantastic pictures. :!: :!: :!:

Thanks for sharing Ray.
Thanks Mike,.....Are you making cams for any Harley V-Twin ?
clunker1, Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:05 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Thanks so much for this great article. It is very well documented. Looks like it took a lot of time to do.

I have a question. Balance factor. Would you also use 60% for a roller bearing case panhead motor? The LH flywheel is quite thick and heavy. Any advice on the balance factor on these older motors?

I was also wondering if a lead slug held in with a threaded plug would be ok?

Thanks
Dennis
saddlebagrail, Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:32 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
clunker1 wrote:Thanks so much for this great article. It is very well documented. Looks like it took a lot of time to do.

I have a question. Balance factor. Would you also use 60% for a roller bearing case panhead motor? The LH flywheel is quite thick and heavy. Any advice on the balance factor on these older motors?

I was also wondering if a lead slug held in with a threaded plug would be ok?

Thanks
Dennis
Dennis

I have balanced my own 67 Shovel with a 60% balance factor and it is really smooth even if my flywheels are among the heaviest of all Harley,Ray

Lead plug are soft compare to Tungstene/Mallory and if you are using a threaded portion at the end do not crush the lead plug by overtorquing them or the thread could move.

To make sure you are using brake cleaner,Loctite primer and Red Loctite to make sure thread do not move after it is set.
Flathead80, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 1:00 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
I use the identical system to balance old flatheads as does Ray. What Ray did to the rod end does not weaken it as implied by Cotton. Old flathead racers used to drill holes the length of the rod to lighten them. I have a set in one of my engines that was raced for years and is still going strong. I used to use Jahn's racing pistons, which were heavier than stock, and put them on polished and shot peened rods that had more metal removed that those shown by Ray. I have never had a rod fail - ever. I am rebuilding two ULH's this very minute. One is a 0.020" OS and the other a 0.030" OS with a small increase in stroke with lightened flywheels. If you don't think equalizing the small ends of the rods makes for a smoother engine, you just haven't balanced many engines. It works and works very well. I can't imagine why anyone would not do so. I have been riding Harleys since since 1959, and some of them would vibrate you into numbness within 20 miles. Nothing I know of smooths them out better than a good static balance job. Some of the Bonneville guys go to amazing lengths to balance their engines as they lighten the reciprocating mass (and rotating mass in some cases). I go with what works, and Ray's method works.

Just my opinion. Your choice.

Jim 8)
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 1:08 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Flathead80 wrote:I use the identical system to balance old flatheads as does Ray. What Ray did to the rod end does not weaken it as implied by Cotton. Old flathead racers used to drill holes the length of the rod to lighten them. I have a set in one of my engines that was raced for years and is still going strong. I used to use Jahn's racing pistons, which were heavier than stock, and put them on polished and shot peened rods that had more metal removed that those shown by Ray. I have never had a rod fail - ever. I am rebuilding two ULH's this very minute. One is a 0.020" OS and the other a 0.030" OS with a small increase in stroke with lightened flywheels. If you don't think equalizing the small ends of the rods makes for a smoother engine, you just haven't balanced many engines. It works and works very well. I can't imagine why anyone would not do so. I have been riding Harleys since since 1959, and some of them would vibrate you into numbness within 20 miles. Nothing I know of smooths them out better than a good static balance job. Some of the Bonneville guys go to amazing lengths to balance their engines as they lighten the reciprocating mass (and rotating mass in some cases). I go with what works, and Ray's method works.

Just my opinion. Your choice.

Jim 8)
Thanks Jim for your input,I know that it is among the smoothness you could achieve the way I did my balancing job, but some tend to be reluctant the way I do it,some say rods may be weaken,I have done strocker that way and feeling was incredible after the balancing job ,and never have one failed or never had any come back,Ray
Cotten, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 1:35 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
You people just don't get it...

Look at the photo I posted of the pair of rod tops, and who can tell which is the female, and which is the male?

If you chopped them off at the bottom of the photo, they would, for all practical purposes, weigh the same, and that is a good thing!
The tops of the rods are the parts that move in different directions. Their bottoms rotate in unison, like the rest of the rotating mass.

But the bottoms of the rods are not equal, as the forked female bottom is much heavier. Yet they too, move up and down through the stroke, reciprocating proportionalely.

So the applied technique is to weigh the top half of the rod, as it will also weigh a portion of the bottom. The top of the female rod will always read to weigh more than the male, because it is half of a much heavier rod.

Thus the inequality of the two rods is accounted for, without making the actual part of the rods that fly in different directions horribly unequal.

It worked for a century, and there are serious reasons why female rod tops were never whittled into toothpicks.

Just the basics, not armchair conjuring.

....Cotten
Flathead80, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 5:00 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
No offense Cotton, but I doubt you have ever balanced a Harley engine. Re-examine your little dissertation, and see if you can spot an error in your statements.

I just finished balancing an old flathead 80 that vibrated so badly, the owner would have to ride with one hand at a time to avoid numbness. After balancing, it was obvious the two flywheels were not a matched set from the factory. I used a balance factor of 55% (flathead), and discovered one of the wheels was in balance within a single 0.25" deep 1/2" hole opposite the rod pin. The second was way out of balance and required way more drilling. I also had to remove 12.54 grams from the end of one of the rods. Got any idea of the volume of 12.54 grams of steel? It was a polish job. I used up my last set of Jahn's pistons (hint, hint) as this engine will make a cross country trip this fall (Wilmington to LA), and one of the points of the trip is to demonstrate the reliability of the old flatties. I will bet my next check that this old beast will run as smooth as silk and that lightened rod won't fail. If we make it, you will see that bikes (and engines) in one of our biker rags. My name will appear as the engine builder of two of the three bikes. There will be no chase vehicle. It's a wait, but maybe we can continue this discussion after the trip and demonstrate some real world results (or not). Incidentally, I decided to rebuild my Green 80 for the trip. It is converted for electric start as I don't like kicking over 80 ci+ engines every time I want to go somewhere. The Green 80 is a big time relieved flattie bored 0.030" OS, tricked out drive bearing setup (INA bearing running on a later model CH'ed output shaft), ported intakes, warmed over (reground) intake cams, ceramic coated piston tops and exhaust ports, hand fitted oil pumps (both), and hand matched gasket surfaces breathing through a 40mm Mikuni. It will break the century mark in a heartbeat and run at 80mph all day long. Guess what? It is balanced using the method recommended by Ray.

I don't understand why you are attacking Ray, as Ray is correctly assuming the reciprocating forces dominate the rotational forces at the end of the rod. The rotational forces are maxed at the rod pin and zero at the piston pin. The reciprocating forces are maxed at the piston pin and minimized at the rod pin. A difference in reciprocating force will produce a more noticeable vibration. Try it yourself sometime.

Jim
Cotten, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
facepalm-triple.jpg
It never ceases to astound me how the gullible can be impressed by bell an whistles, Folks.

Motor balancing has nothing to do with handlebar vibrations, and total flymass has nothing to do with factor.

Learn the basics, first Folks, and then play with your toys.

....Cotten
Flathead80, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 7:04 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
What are you talking about? Where are you getting your information? Superman comic books? Anyone who says an unbalanced engine won't induce a vibration in the handlebars shouldn't even be in this conversation. I have seen a Panhead that was put together with parts off eBay that (before balancing) was almost unrideable due to a vibration that would shake you hands of the bars. After balancing, the bike wasn't like new, but she ran smooth at highway speeds. A Harley is made up of many rotating and reciprocating parts in differing planes that all contribute to the final ride. The entire mass is connected by bolts, pins, etc. that pass along whatever vibration is imparted to them. You can't eliminate all unbalanced forces, since even ignition timing (and ignition) can impart a change in felt vibration at differing rpm. Vibrations have different amplitudes and frequencies that can change due to outside forces (wind) or changing rpm, or varying accelerations. You can idle a top fuel dragster up to the line with ease, but hammer that sucker and you will discover vibration takes on a whole new dimension.

I am fairly new to this forum, and know no one on the forum. I am a retired engineer (no trains) who would enjoy an in depth discussion on this subject, but I suspect you are reading stuff on the net between posts and not quite understanding what you have read. Balancing an engine doesn't mean it will feel the same over the entire rpm range, and for lack of a better description, the Balance Factor can be viewed as a means of moving that "sweet spot" up and down the range. It is very easy to sit back and arrogantly pontificate on what makes an engine run faster/better/smoother/etc.; but a totally different world opens up when you are the guy who has to physically produce the desired result.

I am going to bow out of this intercourse, as it is too one sided for my tastes. Keep on trucking, Ray. The system works for you and it works for me, and the third party doesn't appear to work at all.

Jim :D
Cotten, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 7:26 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Jim!

Please don't ask a question and then leave.
You might benefit.

Here's a source of theory basics: http://virtualindian.org/1techflywheel.htm
(Please note that I only moderated, and the valuable information that you really aught to grasp isn't mine.)

And you really need not throw personal attacks.
(I suspect that you may not have even been born yet when I was toiling in a speed shop on a Stewart-Warner, balancing Harleys, autos, and even Caterpillar hardware as well.)

The theory I endorse worked for a century, made these machines the icons we revere, and Mother Nature's laws of physics haven't changed. Ask yourself why Harley rod tops were always the same size. And Indians. And all V-twins.

....Cotten
john HD, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 7:29 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Gentlemen,

We strive for civil conversations here. This is not a tribal chopper site.

Jim, since you are new here i'm cutting some slack. However, when you start a post with "no offense" and follow with an insult i suspect you ment to offend in the first place. Prove me wrong...

Cotten, i think you have gotten your point across. Let's please move on.

This thread is locked until further notice.

john
john HD, Posted: Sat May 03, 2014 11:53 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
ok let's try this again.

john
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 04, 2014 2:35 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Hi to everyone reading this thread

From my first post ,about the Harley engine balancing theory ,my goal was to demonstrate to internet users and forum members here,how I do my own Harley balancing,I did experiment quite all of my life with a lot of stuff,and I will continue as long as I can,you can check my blog on Caimag,I had written a few stories, but again not all will agree on how I do my things.

http://www.caimag.com/wordpress/categor ... tech-blog/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I did try the balancing without equalizing rods and also with equalizing the reciprocating weight of rods,there is definitly a difference,but maybe it is just me that feel the difference,under the pants.....,It seem that Cotten from this forum did is own balancing but not the way I did it,and says that you could not achieve a smoother engine by equalizing the top portion of the rods(reciprocating weight) ,every engine builders that make high performance engine ,normally equalize both rotating and reciprocating weigh on all rods to achieve the best results , hopefully Cotten will demonstrate how he do is own stuff sometimes in the future...

It is very easy to criticize others work,taking example from others place from the net,ect,.....for those who want to read this thread ,hope it will help you understand the principle of the Harley engine balancing myth and help you understand how thing is done to achieve a really smooth engine,some will disagree with me and some will approve my way of doing thing ,in this case balance a Harley engine,just my 2 cents,Ray

I will not take the time to create long thread like this here anymore,don't worth the time, versus the end results.....
Cotten, Posted: Sun May 04, 2014 6:12 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Don't let your indignation get in your own way, Ray!

I use the traditional theory.
I did not invent it (I'm not that old!), but it did make these phenomenal machines the icons we revere for a Century.

You believe that you are "equalizing" the rod tops, when you actually are making them grossly unequal.

Please re-read my previous posts carefully.
Someday you will come to an epiphany. An apology to me will not be necessary.

Sincerely,...
....Cotten

PS: And no, I do not go to caimag. The owner burned me three times, and I don't even want to give him a cookie.
Flathead80, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 1:32 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
If one lightens the small end of the forked rod, the center of mass of the rod moves closer to the crank pin. Tell me, Cotten, does this not reduce the reciprocating mass of the forked rod? What Ray is doing is reducing the reciprocating mass, which is a desirable thing. It also brings the reciprocating weight of the forked rod closer to the reciprocating mass of the male rod. Quite frankly, Ray's method is better than yours, as it places the system into a better state of balance. I realize now that you will never admit it, but as you succinctly pointed out, what you say and how you say it says more about one than one suspects.

Have a nice day, Cotton. If I had known your only complaint was that you just didn't like the idea of altering the rod end from the mistaken idea that it placed the system at a greater level of imbalance or damaged the rod, I would probably have just watched another episode of Lassie.

Jim 8)
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 2:45 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Jim!

Please think seriously about it.

You want the masses of the two rod tops that are moving in different directions to be equal.
Intuition, if not common sense, should tell you that they should be of similar size.

The rotating mass of the unequal bottoms move in unison, because there is only one "throw", or crankpin, unlike an auto.

The whole point of hanging rods to weigh them is to account for the proportional reciprocating mass of the bottoms.
That is why female rod tops will always calculate to weigh more than male rod tops.

But there is only one reciprocating mass for a V-twin: All of it.

Please think seriously.

This point of view is not my own, but belongs to the V-twin motor designers' of the entire last century.
You argue with the Founders, not me.

....Cotten
Flathead80, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 4:39 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Are you trying to tell me that moving the rod center of mass closer to the crank pin does not reduce reciprocating mass?

Jim
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 11:22 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Our disagreement, Jim,..

Is the whittling on the female rod top.

It does not make the masses moving in different directions equal, it makes them unequal.

Fortunately for you, the design is so forgiving, that the motors will run "smoothly" even with different sizes of pistons!

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 12:44 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Hi Cotten

To try to clear something here.....Concerning the female rod reciprocating weight,it is not always the case that the female top rod(female reciprocating part) is heavier than the male top rod,I would say 50 /50,sometimes male reciprocating is heavier than the female and sometimes female is heavier than male reciprocating weight,so about half and half,anyway from the last few balancing jobs I did ,but maybe those thing just happen to me:-),but I could tell that they are about the same in average,I just made a check in my previous balancing sheets.


....now about pistons,even if they are different size it really doesn't bother too much if you are using same brand /type,the reason is they are very close to each other in weight, from standard size to maximum oversize,let say at .070 in over,all that for the purpose to stay close as balancing as the flywheel were balance before,so you do not have to take the bottom end out to balance again due to a change in pistons,you could check several size of pistons from the same manufacturer and you will see that there are very close to each others,Ray
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 1:10 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Ray!

Of the dozens of Harley and Indian rods that I have weighed over the last three decades, the female rod top was invariably, significantly heavier than the male.

It is half of a much heavier rod!

And my point about running "smooth" even with different size pistons is that what the rider feels has nothing to do with the balance.
If you've got shakes, you've got a mechanical problem.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Hi to all

Well I don't know what to say, to prove that sometimes male top rod portion(part of reciprocating weight) is heavier than female top portion of rods,the best I can do to prove my point is show some of my balancing sheets,so all can see what we are talking about,for sure complete female rod is heavier nothing to argue here ,this is not the arguing is about right now, but the top reciprocating portion that we have a different perception of...

here is my sheets,all name date address and serial number have been covered for simple reason but the rest is all there,it is kinda open to public which is not something I do very often,but if it can help clarify some thing ,maybe it would help some understand that it is not necassary the top female rod portion that heavier all the time but it happen that top male portion could also be heavier sometimes.

Cotten specify that over décades of weighting different rods.......the female rod top was invariably, significantly heavier than the male.


As you can all see I use my own custom made balancing sheets.You could see in the third pics that this set up use S&S rod(Supreme) which was amongst the biggest difference I have seen,for the rest they are close so not too much to take off the top of rods,piston or even wrist pins...note also the big end(rotating part of rods you could see that female is way heavier but not necessarly the top portion) some use different factor than me,but I am quite satisfied with the 60% factor,58% for racing seem to be better by some, as some still use the 50% factor that Harley was using until 1973 ,and some use the 55% factor,it will just move the compromise to another range of rpm/speed,but this is not the arguying right now but more about top female portion that is much heavier all the time which is NOT true,...or maybe those things just happen to me over time,Ray

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
Flathead80, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 5:19 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:....And my point about running "smooth" even with different size pistons is that what the rider feels has nothing to do with the balance.
If you've got shakes, you've got a mechanical problem. ....Cotten
You are just plain old wrong on this one, Cotten. A Harley engine can be so far out of mechanical balance that it will shake you 'til you just want to go home. Check out Balance Masters. They make a living reducing bike shake, and they do it by balancing the engine. I have improved the ride of old flatties, and some drastically, simply by balancing the engine with no other modifications to the bike.

http://www.balancemasters.com/hotbikespread.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am amazed you would make such a statement.

Jim
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 5:28 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
I have my own sheets too, Ray!

Looking over a handfull that I did not give back to the customers who paid for them, I see the least difference of 6g for S&S rods, and the most was 27g, with a median of somewhere around 15g.

Even a sheet from a 1976 job I farmed to Lakeshore is 22g difference.

When weighed to the tenth of a gram, I consider 3g significant.

Half of a big rod will always be more than half of smaller rod.

I cannot view the first page of this thread, as my dial-up freezes after a megabyte per page, and I get an "illegal operation" window.

So I suspect your means of "hanging" the rods.

Did you keep it simple?
RODHANG.jpg
....Cotten
PS: Jim!

Stop listening to your barroom buddies.

Balancemasters does not balance, it dampens.
Flathead80, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:Our disagreement, Jim,..Is the whittling on the female rod top. It does not make the masses moving in different directions equal, it makes them unequal. Fortunately for you, the design is so forgiving, that the motors will run "smoothly" even with different sizes of pistons! ....Cotten
The masses of the rod were already unequal, but matching the small end rod weights improves the balance and reduces reciprocating weight. It is a matter of physics; and unless you can demonstrate mathematically that I am wrong, you won't change my mind.

Jim 8)
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 6:05 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
C'mon, Jim!

Reducing your reciprocating weight only increases your factor.

Folks,

Back in the '80s, 52% was the preferred factor,

Then over time, 60% became the preferred factor.

They all ran "smooth".

How can that be?

Its because shakes are a mechanical issue.
Any decent overhaul should correct shakes.

Balancing a V-twin is a tuning tool.

....Cotten
Mr.Big, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 6:33 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
I'll bet this all winds up as one of those '' agree to disagree '' threads but I have enjoyed the discussion immensely...

PS, Tom, we only collect chocolate chip cookies at caimag........ :) o
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
[quote="Cotten"]

So I suspect your means of "hanging" the rods.

Did you keep it simple?
RODHANG.jpg
quote]

Cotten


This is what I use now,I did several device and come up with this one I am using now , you are going to tell me that I don't have the device to weight my rods accuratly,or I cannot weight both rod end...you know what I am a machinist instructor and like to show how thing are done correctly with the best possible set-up,I learn new things everyday and I am open to new idea,I also like to show the readers how I do my things,and i am not reluctant to pass my knowledge and hopefully some will learn from it,hard to tell if your set up is better than mine,but I did tried that method also...we would all appreciate more from you than arguying with words here and there,as you seem to know much more than many here,Ray


Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
RUBONE, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 7:52 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Nice set-up Ray.
A couple of comments,
All V-Twins, especially narrow angle like H-D and Indian will shake. It is inherent in the design.
Balancing helps control that shake, it does not eliminate it.
Varying factors move the shake up or down the rpm scale. Different ratios work better on different engines due to many factors, but primarily the rpm at which it is used most. Low rpm sloggers tend to like the lower factors as H-D originally used. Higher performance engines that operate at higher rpms like a higher factor. The factor just moves the shake to a place where it is less offensive.
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 8:17 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
RUBONE wrote:Nice set-up Ray.
A couple of comments,
All V-Twins, especially narrow angle like H-D and Indian will shake. It is inherent in the design.
Balancing helps control that shake, it does not eliminate it.
Varying factors move the shake up or down the rpm scale. Different ratios work better on different engines due to many factors, but primarily the rpm at which it is used most. Low rpm sloggers tend to like the lower factors as H-D originally used. Higher performance engines that operate at higher rpms like a higher factor. The factor just moves the shake to a place where it is less offensive.
Hi Robbie

«Compromise» is the appropriate words when talking about harley balancing,you cannot have it smooth in all rpm range ,60% is found nowadays to be the better for a Big twins for a 55 to 75 miles and hours rides,some prefer different factor,like 58% when you want to move higher in RPM range for faster speed,different frame design will also change the factor like the rubber mount that use 52%,....as long as front and rear reciprocating weight is the same :D ,that way both forces are cancel when piston is moving in different direction on the up and down movement via the 45 degrees design,...at 90 degrees like a V-8 engine,both primary force are cancel which only leave a secondary and less signifiant force active at double the speed,Ray

Balancing a Harley engine is a must..... and everyone should do that with their engine ,if you want to ride your old machine and enjoy it,then give it a good balancing job......
Cotten, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 8:39 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
You did it again Ray.

Too many bytes for my dial-up and old OS.
I have to hit "stop" or it shuts off my browser.

So I can't see your bells and whistles.

....Cotten
PS: Mr. Big!
After Buzz K burned me three times, I wouldn't give him a buffalo chip.
saddlebagrail, Posted: Mon May 05, 2014 11:52 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:You did it again Ray.

Too many bytes for my dial-up and old OS.
I have to hit "stop" or it shuts off my browser.

So I can't see your bells and whistles.

....Cotten
PS: Mr. Big!
After Buzz K burned me three times, I wouldn't give him a buffalo chip.

Cotten

That is time to upgrade your dial up connection to the high speed internet,if you want to see what I post....cause everybody already saw what I have post except you,Ray

PS
There should be a reason why Buzz burned you three times off Caimag
I am on several forums and never had a problem like that, :wink:
Cotten, Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 12:22 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
To begin with, Ray,...

Buzzed K. burned me the first time before he even started caimag.
It is my own fault for trusting him the second time, and his third offense was pure malice.

And easy for you to say "update".
It takes resources, and I spend all of mine on foolish things like insurance and health care.

But you get your wish, as my dial-up ISP just notified me that they are folding. I may be soon absent for a while.
(Hooray say the wankers!)

Curious how folks so interested in obsolete machinery jump quickly to chide anyone who tries to push them to their limits.

At any rate, if you don't find that female rod tops are not heavier than their male mates, you really aught to give your methods another look.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 1:41 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Cotten wrote:
At any rate, if you don't find that female rod tops are not heavier than their male mates, you really aught to give your methods another look.

....Cotten

When I weight rods,I take the complete female and male rods weight, than I weight the rotating and reciprocating weight of each rods several times to make sure I achieve the same results to total weight of the rod itself,...so ,total weight of both rods ,and then rotating weight and reciprocating weight,so that both my rotating and reciprocating end up to within 3 grams (maximum of the total weight of each rods,I would say it is very common to have it lower than that in the 1 grams difference),as you casn see in my pics I use a Dial o grams not a regular triple beam as in Cotten pics....when within 3 grams at the most of total weight ,I add or subtract 2 grams to the rotating and add or subtract 1 grams to the reciprocating to achieve my final goal.

My rod weighting method is as good as your method,I have tested more than one or 2 methods myself,believe me and I am sure all here that knows how to balance and engine would agree, and the fact is that a male reciprocating rod is found heavier sometimes does mean that balancing both front and rear reciprocating weight really make a difference in balancing at the end.

You strongly believe that if the rear female rod is a lot heavier that the front male rod, it means that the top reciprocating weight of the female rod is a lot heavier by default to the male top reciprocating weight ,which is totally false.

So let see your balancing sheets, so we can all see how you do your things,are you kinda shy or what ? Why are you just talking and not showing what you are able to do,I am not afraid to learn new things along the way, maybe it is time to stop arguying with me or my method,and let see what you could show us,instead of only talking against my proven method,Ray
Cotten, Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 11:56 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
saddlebagrail wrote:...You strongly believe that if the rear female rod is a lot heavier that the front male rod, it means that the top reciprocating weight of the female rod is a lot heavier by default to the male top reciprocating weight ,which is totally false....
It is not false, Ray,

Please remember that the bottoms of the rods also rise and fall with the stroke, so a proportion of the bottoms also reciprocate.

That is why we hang them!
Surely you knew that? It is fundamental to motor balancing.

....Cotten
PS: My sheets are in MSPublisher, so I must scan one.
Cotten, Posted: Sat May 10, 2014 11:54 pm   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
Hey Ray!

An interested fellow came by with a "smart phone", and brought up a few of your pics of your apparati.

It took magnifier glasses, but it was immediately apparent that you have restrained and encumbered the rods as you hang them.

You would do better with sewing thread.

Seriously Ray,... in all earnest, and in all honesty.

....Cotten
saddlebagrail, Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 12:51 am   Post subject: Re: Harley engine balancing, reverse engineering, and balanc
You are absolutely right Mr Cotton,I should stop balancing engine right away,poor balancing device I got there,also I would say that those C3 bearings are very hard to turn and make extreme restriction on end rods,sorry again to brought up my pictures and stories,hope you would apologize for all my mistakes,I should have listen to you at first and do exactly what you did ,hopefully in a near future you could bring a complete story about it,I am sure some here would like to know how you really do your things,again I apologize for what I bring here on this forum,I should have keep it to myself,I am learning everyday and hopefully some day I will be able to do it right like you,Ray :)

Comments: 54 [Leave a comment]