welding balance weights

I've never seen a crank balanced like this before and would some expert opinions on using this up to 6500 rpm.
It's a 4.15 cast Scat crank.

rmk57 wrote:I've never seen a crank balanced like this before and would some expert opinions on using this up to 6500 rpm.
It's a 4.15 cast Scat crank.

who to know without a picture, so I can say I never seen it done

You need to get a photo host like photobucket and link it.

Think I've got it!

That's very poor quality of a job you got right there.

So what happened to inserting a Mallory/tungsten slug... Must have been Friday afternoon Miller time

That shop do a bunch of chevy engines????

FalconEh wrote:So what happened to inserting a Mallory/tungsten slug... Must have been Friday afternoon Miller time

kim wrote:That shop do a bunch of chevy engines????

Wow that even looks wrong to the eyes of a novice

You should have added "Please use Mallory if it is light on the throws" instead of "I'm on a budget and I need it done cheap".

Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

kim wrote:Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

The weld on the other side is a better looking, flatter with more penetration from what I can see.
I'm going to go ahead an run it.
The balance was a flat rate cost, plus the price of the Mallory. I would have gladly paid an extra $100 and have it done right instead of this f#uck up.

I wouldn't run that if my life depended on it...

Bad experience from many years ago with a cast Cleveland crank...

when the weld breaks and the mallory comes off bad shit starts happening in a big hurry...

Hope you have a diaper on this car.



dkp

that is hidious dont run it!

bosshoss wrote:I wouldn't run that if my life depended on it...

Bad experience from many years ago with a cast Cleveland crank...

when the weld breaks and the mallory comes off bad shit starts happening in a big hurry...

Hope you have a diaper on this car.



dkp

I believe they should only diaper the Chevy's (see general post) but X2 Without a diaper on this balance that projectile flying through the oil pan and the fender at my family is not cool...add in the cast welding is an art all things considered, a song comes to mind...I Want My Money Back! JMO

I'm going to contact the shop and see what they can do for me. If they say nothing, then I'll do some name dropping.

Give them the link- https://www.429-460.com/t21430p15-welding-balance-weights

Rmk Boss9 wrote:

kim wrote:Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

The weld on the other side is a better looking, flatter with more penetration from what I can see.
I'm going to go ahead an run it.
The balance was a flat rate cost, plus the price of the Mallory. I would have gladly paid an extra $100 and have it done right instead of this f#uck up.

"RIGHT" is a matter of opinion.  There is nothing mechanically wrong with how that is done except that  it doesn't look pretty.
Just as I replied to you on the other site.

EDIT:  Next time be sure to mention that you need it to look pretty, also. Then it can all get filled-in with weld and it can be ground pretty ... at the further expense of "time and material".

rmcomprandy wrote:

Rmk Boss9 wrote:

kim wrote:Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

The weld on the other side is a better looking, flatter with more penetration from what I can see.
I'm going to go ahead an run it.
The balance was a flat rate cost, plus the price of the Mallory. I would have gladly paid an extra $100 and have it done right instead of this f#uck up.

"RIGHT" is a matter of opinion.  There is nothing mechanically wrong with how that is done except that  it doesn't look pretty.

With this response I retact my previous comment, as he Definately knows more about the functionality of that picture than I Do

Get what you ask for...and pay for.

rmcomprandy wrote:

Rmk Boss9 wrote:

kim wrote:Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

The weld on the other side is a better looking, flatter with more penetration from what I can see.
I'm going to go ahead an run it.
The balance was a flat rate cost, plus the price of the Mallory. I would have gladly paid an extra $100 and have it done right instead of this f#uck up.

"RIGHT" is a matter of opinion.  There is nothing mechanically wrong with how that is done except that  it doesn't look pretty.
Just as I replied to you on the other site.

EDIT:  Next time be sure to mention that you need it to look pretty, also. Then it can all get filled-in with weld and it can be ground pretty ... at the further expense of "time and material".

It's definitely a time saver! Maybe they should all be does this way. I wanted it done like the other 99% of the shops do, that's all.

rmcomprandy wrote:

Rmk Boss9 wrote:

kim wrote:Looks like a decent weld.  So aside from the fact that its a little back yard.   Through 6500 shouldn't be an issue.  Once the pans on no-one knows if you have Mona Lisa or velvet elvis under the cover.

The weld on the other side is a better looking, flatter with more penetration from what I can see.
I'm going to go ahead an run it.
The balance was a flat rate cost, plus the price of the Mallory. I would have gladly paid an extra $100 and have it done right instead of this f#uck up.

"RIGHT" is a matter of opinion.  There is nothing mechanically wrong with how that is done except that  it doesn't look pretty.
Just as I replied to you on the other site.

EDIT:  Next time be sure to mention that you need it to look pretty, also. Then it can all get filled-in with weld and it can be ground pretty ... at the further expense of "time and material".

x2 on what Randy said. I'm no pro, but I do spend massive amounts of time in my engine builders shop and do some of the balance jobs that come through (got to pay my machine shop bills homehow!). Sometimes the crank needs weight added where there really isnt an area to add weight. There are tricks where you remove or add in other areas to try to get the balance to move to add/remove weight back where there is material. Looking that this is on the very edge of a throw, this may have been the case. Since this was a "flat rate" job, if this was a small shop, time is money so they did the job to make it mechanically correct and not have an excessive amount of time wasted to make it "pretty".

I also agree with Randy,ive seen some cranks and other parts back in the day that would scare you to death,but they did the job.

bbf-falcon wrote:I also agree with Randy,ive seen some cranks and other parts back in the day that would scare you to death,but they did the job.

Years ago, we would get a piece of mallory and drill a 7/16 hole through the middle. Then drill and tap the side of the crankshaft counterweight and bolt the weight in place.
Realistically, that was more unsightly but, those all worked just fine. It takes a bunch of deteriorating circumstances to break an alloy rod bolt and the weight attached to those is a whole lot more.

rmk57 wrote:I've never seen a crank balanced like this before and would some expert opinions on using this up to 6500 rpm.  It's a 4.15 cast Scat crank.

If it's correctly balanced and that's where the weight was needed then it's perfectly fine for your appplication and a complete non-issue.


Which parts (piston/rod) were used for the rest of the rotating assembly, and exactly how old is the crankshaft?