Discussion in 'Early CJ5 and CJ6 Tech' started by OrangeCJ5, Apr 8, 2016.
Ok folks take a few minutes and read the article.........on Crankshafts & harmonic balancers . Harmonic balancer/damper - How to remove and install
And the opening statement: The harmonic balancer or damper is usually a tight press-fit onto the end, or "snout" of the crankshaft. This is so the torsional vibrations of the crankshaft generated by the power pulses of the engine can be transmitted to- and absorbed or dissipated by- the harmonic balancer. If the fit isn't tight, the harmonic balancer will not be able to absorb the vibrations and in some cases this can lead to a failure of the crank or damper key/keyway that locates the damper on the crankshaft in the correct position, or the retaining bolt could fail, not to mention possible internal engine damage resulting from the undamped harmonics.
This above statement alone for an Odd fired Buick V6 engine that has nothing but torsional vibrations I think speaks volumes.....
And further: The damper is held on by a 0.0007"-0.0014" press fit.
I'm not here to change anyone's mind regarding a slip on / off vibration damper nor the use of a 2x4 and a hammer or for that matter a manual written decades ago.............read the article and come away with your own conclusion and then do what you feel is best for your motor............but I'm sticking to what I know works and I will continue to enjoy a press fit harmonic balancer and pull mine off and push them back on with the proper tools.
Just for discussion sake, that would imply that only a fitment type such as a bearing on a shaft would truly be an interference fit. Wouldn't pins that are driven in for example be an interference fit, or is that stretching the true description?
Decades old or not, the jeep manual was written when the engine was new. And when it was new, you could remove the balancer with a simple tap with a soft hammer, which you couldn't do if it were a press fit. I have never seen a version of these engines where it was any different. That's all I was saying to begin with, and I stand by it.
Some of us simple folk get along just fine with some wrenches and a hammer.
I've never messed with the Dauntless but the ease of removal you describe is interesting. Weird compared with what the manual says. I always felt the tapered axle hub was considered an interference fit because it gets to that point of not going any further.
I appreciate all your insight and help. I always want to try and do things the correct way. I love that this forum is filled with people as knowledgeable and willing to share as you. I agree with you that in the 45 years since that manual was written, much better methods have been developed. I didn't have a puller at the time and I really wanted to get the balancer off so I did my best with what I had around. I do have a puller/pusher like you described now and I will use it tonight. Thank you for your help. Mike.
Thanks Mike, As I have mentioned many times before I am a firm believer that these forums can sometimes offer as you stated insight , help and may I add ...........perhaps even some education. And what anyone does with that information is purely open to there own interpretation of the matter given.
Having said that I'm looking forward to you getting to the root of your issues and repairing what needs to be fixed............as that process alone will hopefully further the education process that most desire when visiting these forums.
This is why I am here. I've learned a pile, and I hope to have somewhat contributed here and there.
I think we're all impassioned about what we know, how we learned it, and sometimes, we disagree. Our current boundaries of civility (and moderator enforced norming when it pushes the boundaries) make this a truly unique venue that spans literally generations of experience... Many of our cohorts here engage the rest of us to do things differently, 'better' or simply show us alternate ways to do what we'd had in mind...
I love it.
Now, back to the OP: want to see what the source was and the resolution ends up being...
Most dampers on a Buick v6 have no interference at all. After the center bolt is removed, they usually slide right off. I don't remember ever having to do anything more then a light tap. I definitely have never had to use any type of a puller on one. I have had some really stuck center bolts however.
This has been my experience as well, especially with the Dauntless 225's. Now the chevy's well that's a different deal.
You guys remember the old small block Chevy's that had no balancer bolt?
I've never had to use a puller on a Dauntless harmonic balancer.
Right or Wrong this is what I have............Just measured the "Blueprint 225" components and after measuring it several times , the Dampner ID is .0007 undersized vs the Crank snout OD........It will barely start on the snout but will not push on without some external force...........
1. Timing cover off:
2. How much slack is acceptable?
3. Cleaned up a little, are the timing marks lined up ok?
Not sure if video is working but the timing chain is LOOSE. Like, really loose.
Timing marks look to line up..........which is good............chain is loose and worn out.............replace the timing set.......both gears and chain.
The looseness would have given your motor some variable valve timing...........depending on slack...........chain tightens under load and slacks when unloaded............Change it ..........the motor will be Happier.
Keep in mind this is just the first step in the process..........Looking at the slack just gives you an Idea how much wear is elsewhere..........I would guess before it's all over a complete re-build will be necessary to fix it completely.
I have another V6. From my CJ5 that I swapped an LS into. Should I stop messing with this motor and just swap in the "known good" V6?
I would seriously consider it.
BTW, are we sure the compression tester is accurate? I'd just hate for you to go through all this when it was just a faulty gauge.
I love the section of chain between the head and engine mount. I did that on my '70 to keep the mounts from tearing in races.
That would be your choice..................Are you sure that motor is an Odd-Fire Dauntless? In that picture it looks to be a later 231 even fired motor.
I'm not 100% positive, it's not my tester. The readings with the chain and the poor running/performance seem like it's probably giving good readings.
I will check the casting number today. I'm just afraid the wear in the timing chain is indicative of overall wear. I don't want to do a water pump, timing chain etc. on a motor that's not worth the effort.
Separate names with a comma.