23 replies to this topic

[Freedo]

I searched and only found 2 topics on the subject. Is it really necessary to pay the £89.95 from CS for the removal kit? What do you need to do after removing the shaft? Thanks,

[vocky]

I don't think the courtenay kit is a bad price, it includes all the components required (except the tools)

[cheeky_chops]

I searched and only found 2 topics on the subject.

Is it really necessary to pay the £89.95 from CS for the removal kit?

What do you need to do after removing the shaft?

Thanks,

You could buy the bits seperately, save a few quid maybe.

Her is a (bad) pic of mine after removal:



edit - I have the instructions in a PDF, PM me your email and will send it over (cant copy document contents)

Also, check the bearing caps for wear. Mine were fine

Edited by cheeky_chops, 26 February 2009 - 09:18 AM.

[Freedo]

O, ok... I didn't realise you needed a kit. I thought you could just block the oil ways or some thing? But yes, the CS kit seems like a good price!

[cheeky_chops]

If you remove the balancers and just block the oilways, expect the crank to make a bid for freedom pretty soon!! The kit comprises of (iirc) 8 bolts, a gasket and a very sturdy ladder frame. This ladder is OEM and (a big iirc) off a x20xev engine or similar

[hogman]

Can I ask why you would want to remove the balancer shaft? Does it give more power, better response or some other reason? Cheers Kevin

[salopian]

Can I ask why you would want to remove the balancer shaft? Does it give more power, better response or some other reason?

Cheers
Kevin

[ollster]

Can I ask why you would want to remove the balancer shaft? Does it give more power, better response or some other reason?

Cheers
Kevin

Do the balancer shafts not counter the fact that this is an inherently poorly balanced engine (originally based on a 1.6)? In which case would it not be detrimental to the longevity of the bottom end unless it was properly balanced at the same time as removing the balancer shafts i.e. the kind of thing cnrandall is doing on his race europa project?

Elise Trophy Europa blog

Edited by ollster, 26 February 2009 - 12:32 PM.

[Thorney]

We are certainly balancing the bottom end when we remove them from the VXGT.

[vocky]

I removed the balancer shafts from my 2.2 engine a couple of years ago, it's a myth that the engine becomes lumpy and unbalanced. I had the bottom end balanced a few months ago and the only thing which required rebalancing was the lightened flywheel, the crank was spot on. I do however have steel rods and forged pistons.

[ollster]

I was just going off the data that cnrandall presented on his build blog, also remeber the 2.2 is a completley different engine which is probably a much much newer design, the z20let block dates back to the 70's see below excerpt from his blog which should explain a bit more...

The engine was due to be back from balancing last Saturday but as we had made the decision to source another crank to cut up for testing purposes this deadline had to be pushed back. The crank, which was destined for the chop, arrived with Steve late on Monday, which meant he couldn't do the work until Tuesday. The testing exercise on the crank was worthwhile though as we found that, even with a piston/rod combo some 300grams lighter than stock, there was a 300gram deficit on each crank counter balance. At 7000rpm this equates to a 2 ton bending load on the crank between each cylinder! Looking back through the history of this engine, which is the latest in GM's line of "Family 2" engines, you will find that the block itself dates back to the seventies. The first of these engines had an 8-valve OHC head and a capacity of 1.6 litres, it's our assumption that on raising the capacity of the engine, GM didn't go the extra mile to change the block to accommodate the extra counterbalance required for a larger 86mm (2 litre) stroke and associated heavier pistons. On these current generation engines you will find a dual-mass flywheel, a crank ladder and also dual counter rotating balancer shafts - all signs of GM fighting to control an inherent engine vibration. On the positive side, the sturdy block (which weighs 38.5kg on it's own, that's 18.5 heavier than a Honda K-20 block!) is regarded as virtually bullet proof by the Vauxhall engine experts so stands a good chance of holding the crank in place regardless of the large bending loads placed on it by the imbalance. To cure this problem properly I'm intending to go down two routes, firstly to use tungsten inserts to add mass in every counter weight and secondly to start the search for lighter pistons to reduce the amount of counter balance necessary. These are both modifications requiring careful thought and research so will be left for later in the year and, in the mean time, I will have to hope that the block holds onto the crank firmly enough and I'll keep the engine rev's down to sensible levels.

Edited by ollster, 26 February 2009 - 03:30 PM.

[theolodian]

I removed the balancer shafts from my 2.2 engine a couple of years ago, it's a myth that the engine becomes lumpy and unbalanced.

I had the bottom end balanced a few months ago and the only thing which required rebalancing was the lightened flywheel, the crank was spot on. I do however have steel rods and forged pistons.

Cheers! Now for the other side of the question, why is it worth doing? What if you are thinking of supercharging?

[techieboy]

Mine has had the balancer shafts removed. Vocky did it the moment my back was turned - went inside to make a coffee, came back out to be confronted with the sight of Vocky with long socket extension and hammer, hammering the bearings further into the block! GM say it robs the engine of 10bhp (I think?) in spinning them. I don't think removing them actually adds 10bhp to whatever you've got, rather it doesn't rob that power. I've been without for a year and no adverse effects. No lumpy idle or anything like that. I did feel more vibration in the car at it's natural idle when I was running the 2.4 inlet but I think this was down to the uprated front engine mount transferring more of the natural vibrations into the cabin. Upping the idle speed by 50-100rpm (with my foot) got rid of it entirely and I don't seem to have the "problem" post-SC.

[The Batman]

you should see when then engine is out what he does that pipe can get shorter, so can that... you dont need that, i dont know what that does but you dont need that either

Edited by joe_589, 04 May 2009 - 01:38 PM.

[techieboy]

I know exactly what you mean. I threw a stack of stuff away and still have a box full of unidentified parts that were "no longer required". Gave up trying to understand just what these things were and why it was better repositioned somewhere else. I should have weighed all of the bits and the difference in flywheel weights before they got binned as it probably almost negates the gain in weight from the SC and inlet manifold.

[The Batman]

it does, i did it think mine weighs under a standard vx 2,2 now

[theolodian]

It sounds like mixing Vocky and my 1.5 piles of car parts could be a wild ride. Thanks for the feedback on deleting balance shafts.

[MrSimba]

Thanks for the feedback on deleting balance shafts.

If your at the Midlands Meet next month there are a few of us there now with the balancer shafts taken out, your more than welcome to come out in mine and see what you think

Good to meet you yesterday as well, sounds like you've quite a project on your hands!

Edited by MrSimba, 04 May 2009 - 04:39 PM.

[vocky]

it does, i did it

think mine weighs under a standard vx 2,2 now

the balancer delete would remove 4 Kg, then the lightened flywheel some more, so you should be under the weight of a standard vx now

[The Batman]

the balancer delete would remove 4 Kg, then the lightened flywheel some more, so you should be under the weight of a standard vx now

plus the other bits and bobs removed

sound proofing is so so heavy

Edited by joe_589, 04 May 2009 - 06:25 PM.