I would like to send him something more personal, do you have a mailing address?
ICE – Thanks for the clarification. Too many things to try to remember. I just remember removal of the balancer insitu has been previously discussed and it is very difficult to do.Indy, Bill aka Shadowman removed the balancer with the engine out of the car, but mentioned that it was a big PITA. So much so that in his opinion, removing one in vitro would be risky without the understanding that the motor may need to be removed.
Thanks Frank for spellchecking (and even reading) my post. Good to know you have my back….. I usually have a dictionary close by and use it frequently. This one just got by in the flurry of composition. Would be nice if the Forum had a spell check feature; but I think you got the gist of what I was trying to say. And I hope this post goes to prove your point on my verbosity (I looked it up first).Attunuate? Maybe attenuate?
Sinovac – Perhaps you did not use the word phrase “they were the same”, however the numerous posts discussing the differences between the FGT balancer and the GT500 units together with the comparative pictures supports your underlying question, “Why did Ford use a different harmonic balancer on the FGT than on the GT500?” I really do not mean to be dismissive here, but why do you CARE? Because one crankshaft out of 4,038 broke for some unknown reason and all us owners should be concerned?I never said they were the same. If you read my prior post carefully you will see I was merely pointing out that Ford has recommended a lighter damper for the 2007 GT500 in higher boost applications to prevent crankshaft failure, and that a lighter damper on the GT might help alleviate any perceived concerns with the GT crank. I would be surprised if my posts confused anyone that read them carefully. I don't sell any parts or services. I was merely passing on information that might be helpful.
Sorry B.M.F., I have never worked for any of the automotive companies. Not sure where that one came from…? But thanks for sharing. I grew up on Chevy small blocks so that might be a true statement.Most all FORD Pushrod motors until the mod motor in 1992-93 were externally balanced...289,302,351w 429/460/ 351 clevland 400m/ 360 chrysler/454 chevys, etc You worked for ford didn't you?
How would I know?? (other than to restate the obvious fact that the engines are all different) Write a letter to the Ford Engineering department and ask them! I am sure all the car companies have proprietary design software calibrated with field experience to design and analyze drivetrain harmonics. I do know, factually, from talking to engineers and managers on the design team for OUR application specific engine that an extensive amount of costly testing and verification work was undertaken before final engine release. Recall in Petunia’s formative stage several different engine powerplants were proposed and once Bill gave the green light for the concept to proceed to production, the MOD V8 proponents (as well as FMC) wanted to make absolutely sure the engine would perform its intended function without any hiccups. (which it has, and is a tribute to the team)By 2008 ford redesigned the balencer on the gt500 and made it 10lbs lighter, HELP ME UNDER STAND WHY?
Mark, how’s the popcorn, buddy? Incidentally you comment on declutching the supercharger during shifting could be accomplished with a device called an “overriding clutch”. It is frequently used in multiengined helicopters to take a failed engine off-line and not steal power from the good engine to rotate the failed engine. In electrical terms think of an overriding clutch as a diode which only permits torque to travel in one direction. Might make an interesting application.Dr. Frank must be into his second or third glass by now as he is well aware that Bill does not respond well to being corrected. I'm going to get some popcorn, this should be good.
Indy, I care much less about the issue than you obviously do. You have missed the entire point of my posts. I have not suggested, nor do I believe, that all GT owners should be concerned about the damper . In fact, my posts clearly indicate otherwise. My point was simply this-IF someone is concerned about the issue, I see no reason why a lighter damper won't minimize any perceived risk of failure. IF a GT owner already has the motor out, why not install a lighter damper in light of the issues with the VERY similar 2007 GT500 damper. I'm not suggesting that any owner ought to pull the motor to change the damper, but if I'm working on the car to the extent Lorenzo is (you remember him, the original poster who was looking for information on the topic), I'm not going to leave the stock damper alone. To be more clear, I'll give you an example. Let's say someone has a bug up their a**, but that bug only has a 1% chance of causing any problems with his intrapersonal relationships. It would be foolish for that person to have a procedure just to remove the bug. However, IF that person is already under the knife and has a doctor up his a**, the good doctor just might say "why don't we remove that bug since I'm already here" thereby eliminating whatever risk, no matter how small.Sinovac – Perhaps you did not use the word phrase “they were the same”, however the numerous posts discussing the differences between the FGT balancer and the GT500 units together with the comparative pictures supports your underlying question, “Why did Ford use a different harmonic balancer on the FGT than on the GT500?” I really do not mean to be dismissive here, but why do you CARE? Because one crankshaft out of 4,038 broke for some unknown reason and all us owners should be concerned?
Perceived risk may not by real risk....My point was simply this-IF someone is concerned about the issue, I see no reason why a lighter damper won't minimize any perceived risk of failure...
The facts speak for themselves. (That's why they are called "expert" witnesses, but please let's not jump to that topic...)I have cross examined enough expert witnesses in my career to know when someone is so clearly biased in their opinion that they refuse to consider any other information.
Thanks you John for your insights and wisdom on the topic. I don't doubt anything you wrote. However there are some that even 4.0 Whipple at 30 lbs would be OK for, EP comes to mind. I will get a chance to see and hear your fine work soon when Lorenzo's car come by my area. I heard Shadowman has the engine you built in place now.The interference fit on every car is a little different. I cannot recommend using the 3.4 or 4.0 blower and predict how long it will last because everyone drives different and everyone stretches the truth about how they drive.