# The next step...



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

well long story short i am building an engine on the side that i have had for months, ferrea has my cylinder head and is designing us some nice goodies to bring the engine to a nice rpm
the head has bin gone for months so i decided to start taking apart the bottom end and picking out my parts of choice to put it back together
the first step i took was having the ballance shafts deleted by [email protected], of course when the engine goes back together everything will be ballanced together so their are no issues http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
hear is a sneak peak of the work and i also put the old parts on our shop scale to see how much we are saving in weight
















here are the 2 shafts, 2 ballancing weights and 3 sprockets on the scale once removed


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 1, 2007)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

Say goodbye to almost 5lbs of rotating mass. (that is prone to failure) Say hello to more HORSEPOWER and less oil aeration. The best part is that you will never know that they are gone.


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

you like our new vw oil consumption scale







that was the first time it was ever used since we bought it


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

I would have used the 06A 1.8T block
less headaches!


----------



## turbodub (Jul 6, 2000)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_you like our new vw oil consumption scale







that was the first time it was ever used since we bought it









whats funnier is i have never even see the scale at my dealership! at least you have it set up http://****************.com/smile/emlove.gif


----------



## B5Bombers (Aug 20, 2008)

*Re: The next step... (turbodub)*

why not just put the 1.8t oil pump setup in there ? use the 19 thooth gear and oil pump drive from a 1.8t it looks like it would work I Have bolted it up but who knows. just a thought


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... (B5Bombers)*

you could do that but once you press on the new sprocket the 1.8T oil pump is still not 100% bolt on, [email protected] did that a long long time ago but their were a few small parts he had to make himself


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 30, 2008)

*Re: The next step... (B5Bombers)*


_Quote, originally posted by *B5Bombers* »_why not just put the 1.8t oil pump setup in there ? use the 19 thooth gear and oil pump drive from a 1.8t it looks like it would work I Have bolted it up but who knows. just a thought

there is a little more to it, but it is do able. I did it that way on my car.


----------



## dubsker (Jan 8, 2006)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Say goodbye to almost 5lbs of rotating mass. (that is prone to failure) Say hello to more HORSEPOWER and less oil aeration. T*he best part is that you will never know that they are gone.*









when i first read this, i thought "no gains"
then i went back to quote your post, and then it hit me "no extra vibrations"
am i getting that right?


----------



## fahrenheit 525 (Nov 3, 2007)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
there is a little more to it, but it is do able. I did it that way on my car.

WOW I'm so far behind


----------



## shortydub (Oct 13, 2004)

*Re: The next step... (dubsker)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dubsker* »_

am i getting that right?

Kinda. The balance shafts do just that and balance out the engines rotating mass. removing them without balancing your motor would most likely cause inherent vibrations. this is why a lot of 4 cylinders have them. the gains could be comparable to a lightweight pulley setup and or a/c delete in that it is freeing up "hp" by making the engine able to rev quicker and removing the parasitic drain it had on it.


_Modified by shortydub at 12:28 AM 3-24-2009_


----------



## B5Bombers (Aug 20, 2008)

*Re: The next step... (shortydub)*

well if you do end up needing any of these parts for what ever I have them and would like to throw them in the trash lol... if I Havent already


----------



## dubsker (Jan 8, 2006)

*Re: The next step... (shortydub)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shortydub* »_
Kinda. The balance shafts do just that and balance out the engines rotating mass. removing them without balancing your motor would most likely cause inherent vibrations. this is why a lot of 4 cylinders have them. the gains could be comparable to a lightweight pulley setup and or a/c delete in that it is freeing up "hp" by making the engine able to rev quicker and removing the parasitic drain it had on it.

_Modified by shortydub at 12:28 AM 3-24-2009_

so why do we have them if randy says we wouldnt even notice that they are gone if we remove them?


----------



## shortydub (Oct 13, 2004)

*Re: The next step... (dubsker)*

they are called balance shafts. since they are no longer in the motor, they will not be able to balance out the vibration caused from the uneven stroke pattern of our motor. But, apparently, removing them does not have as much of an adverse affect on NVH. (at least for a proper strip setup. this is not something you would want to do to your daily)


----------



## MKV John. (Jan 9, 2009)

*FV-QR*

lol, damn jeff. your car's a beast.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 1, 2007)

*Re: The next step... (dubsker)*

I personally can not tell the difference. There are quite a few inline engines that do not have balance shafts from the factory at all. Most inline engines without balance shafts are 2.0 litres or smaller. After 2.0 litres of displacement they become more of a necessity due to higher second order vibrations. With a larger displacement engine you can remove balance shafts to go gain some horsepower but you will more than likely notice when there gone. Some of us have had to deal with failed counter balance shafts already in higher horsepower engines that see more continuous high rpm. The stock assembly retails for almost $1200 which is more than likely going to fail in certain applications. So the counter balance delete is just an option for those who want that few extra HP or don't want to buy another. As to using the 1.8t setup, I think that this would be more expensive and you already have a balance shaft assembly in a 2.0 FSI. Just my opinion of course.


----------



## Kid Hobo (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Say goodbye to almost 5lbs of rotating mass. 

What's the rpm range for these parts... 850 to 7k or whatever the limiter is?


----------



## MFZERO (Mar 13, 2002)

*FV-QR*

damn!


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 1, 2007)

*Re: The next step... (Kid Hobo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Kid Hobo* »_
What's the rpm range for these parts... 850 to 7k or whatever the limiter is? 

I'm assuming what your asking is what the rpm limit is of the counter balance assembly after being modified. My answer would be certainly more than a stock setup. I don't see why this setup won't work in an engine that spins up to 9000 rpm but I'm sure JC will let us know!!!!! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
I'm assuming what your asking is what the rpm limit is of the counter balance assembly after being modified. My answer would be certainly more than a stock setup. I don't see why this setup won't work in an engine that spins up to 9000 rpm but I'm sure JC will let us know!!!!! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

i am trying to decide if i should save this for the new engine i am building or just throw it in the engine that is in the car now
i would have no problem trying to rev 9k once i get the head back from ferrea but i would still need cams and a spring for the hpfp to make it worth it


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 1, 2007)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

I would like to see a dyno before and after to see how much of a gain. I never seem to have time to compare before and after. I'm going to guess that it would be worth 8-10 HP maybe more.


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

i would have no problem doing a before and after on the dyno but i don't have access to a dyno and lift where i can work on my car myself
i don't trust anyone


----------



## Kid Hobo (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_i don't trust anyone










logs. loooooogs. everyone likes logs.


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... (Kid Hobo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Kid Hobo* »_
logs. loooooogs. everyone likes logs.









i am thinking about putting it in and then sending Randy my stock oil pump and having him do another for the spare motor


----------



## QuickA4 (Nov 11, 2003)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Say goodbye to almost 5lbs of rotating mass. (that is prone to failure) Say hello to more HORSEPOWER and less oil aeration. The best part is that you will never know that they are gone.









Can you please explain to me how removing reciprocating weight creates more horsepower please?
It will decrease the inertia of the engine and allow it to accelerate quicker,
thats about it.

I have tested on a engine dyno 2 engine built to the same specs other than the crank shaft, one being normal, other being lightened, i got identical torque and horse power figures, tested on a DTS engine dyno.


----------



## fahrenheit 525 (Nov 3, 2007)

*Re: The next step... (QuickA4)*

cuz less = more


----------



## johnnyrebel (Nov 24, 2008)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

awesome man


----------



## aussievfrss (Sep 8, 2008)

Applying a little physics to this. Trying to put it in as simple terms as possible. An object that rotates within a fixed axis such as a wheel will only rotate as fast as possible in relation to its size. Meaning a smaller wheel will spin faster relative to a larger wheel. 
So theoritically speaking, if you remove some weight, yes the object to be lighter compared to its original state, but it does not spin faster at its maximum point. Only real benefit would be less mass which equals faster acceleration, which may be mistaken as extra horsepower.
Good way to do this in practise is get a piece of string and attach it to an object like a small weight. Hold it and spin it like a propeller. You will notice that it gets to a certain point where regardless of how much force/energy you exert to make it go faster it won't. If you reduce the weight to a smaller size, you will notice that it is easier to turn, but again it gets to a point where it can not go any faster. 
So technically speaking doing something like this will free up more horsepower, but does not make more horsepower. There is technically a difference between freeing horsepower and making horsepower. 
So what does this mean. It means in the lower powerband range your car will be releasing more horsepower compared to its previous state, but once it reaches its terminal(maxmimum) speed it can not release any more power than what it previously produced.
So on a dyno you will probably see a pick up of power from 2000rpm to 4000rpm but than gradually the difference will be 0 when reaching the objects terminal rotating speed.


_Modified by aussievfrss at 11:02 PM 6-11-2009_


----------



## kimhemm (Aug 8, 2008)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*

Can't wait to see the next... and the next... and the next... and the next...


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... (kimhemm)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kimhemm* »_Can't wait to see the next... and the next... and the next... and the next...

i got lots of goodies on the way, sounds like i won't be making the drag races at Waterfest next month but my car will be their in atleast 1 booth and my car will deff be worth the wait..we are aiming to skip right past the 10 second range







maybe fall show n go will be more of a realistic time goal on the car
and so far i have seen no negative affects of the Ballance shaft delete..however i would still love to get the new fluidampr that was released a few weeks ago
and on another note the ATP turbo kit is coming off the car prob in the next week or so


----------



## [email protected] USA (May 17, 2007)

*Re: (aussievfrss)*


_Quote, originally posted by *aussievfrss* »_
So technically speaking doing something like this will free up more horsepower, but does not make more horsepower. There is technically a difference between freeing horsepower and making horsepower. 


Freeing up hp and making hp are the same things. If you were making 300hp at the wheels before and you do something and now are doing 310hp at the wheels you MADE 310 more hp. The same could be argued for everythign then including a bigger turbo, your just freeing up the hp that the stock smaller turbo wasn't able to flow.. 
If you have another 10hp you MADE another 10hp to the wheels even if it means you "freed" it it up somehow.
As for this modification specifically, it can make hp. This is not a lightened crank which can and will make power in some applications, one test by one person does not prove that it doesnt' work. Although for this instance even if it were true removing no weight made no power that still would not apply to this. The oil pump is an accessory essentially just like your alternator or AC. It is being driven by the engine, anything that is being driven by the engine is using power the engine is producing. If you can remove this parasite on the engine you can make more power to the wheels which is all that ever matters with power. Reducing the weight of the balance shafts or removing them, I actually am using an oil pump from a different motor completely, will make power because its less work the engine has to do to spin them. Which means you get more power to the ground.


----------



## Twelvizm (Apr 12, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Freeing up hp and making hp are the same things. If you were making 300hp at the wheels before and you do something and now are doing 310hp at the wheels you MADE 310 more hp. The same could be argued for everything then including a bigger turbo, your just freeing up the hp that the stock smaller turbo wasn't able to flow.. 
If you have another 10hp you MADE another 10hp to the wheels even if it means you "freed" it it up somehow.
As for this modification specifically, it can make hp. This is not a lightened crank which can and will make power in some applications, one test by one person does not prove that it doesn't' work. Although for this instance even if it were true removing no weight made no power that still would not apply to this. The oil pump is an accessory essentially just like your alternator or AC. It is being driven by the engine, anything that is being driven by the engine is using power the engine is producing. If you can remove this parasite on the engine you can make more power to the wheels which is all that ever matters with power. Reducing the weight of the balance shafts or removing them, I actually am using an oil pump from a different motor completely, will make power because its less work the engine has to do to spin them. Which means you get more power to the ground. 

And this all brings us back to the old adage "There is no replacement for displacement."








I'm excited to see what else you crazy kids do.








More info on how to properly delete the shafts pease...


----------



## kimhemm (Aug 8, 2008)

*Re: The next step... ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
and on another note the ATP turbo kit is coming off the car prob in the next week or so

Eurojet ??


----------



## [email protected] (May 13, 2005)

*Re: The next step... (kimhemm)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kimhemm* »_
Eurojet ??

maybe


----------



## rissa422 (Jan 17, 2009)

looking good, how much doe this service run. I'm looking into doing this on my car.


----------



## Twelvizm (Apr 12, 2004)

*Re: (rissa422)*

Any progress?


----------



## CoNGLoMeRaTeGTi (Apr 4, 2007)

Any DIYs for this?

or am i going to have to go into this blind folded?

LOL


----------



## IMAN973 (Jun 1, 2006)

CoNGLoMeRaTeGTi said:


> Any DIYs for this?
> 
> or am i going to have to go into this blind folded?
> 
> LOL


HAHA we were just talking aboout this in the fs thread lol. We could find these pictures anywhere. I have my pump on my bench right now trying to see how i could pull them out. I may just have my machine shop do it.


----------



## CoNGLoMeRaTeGTi (Apr 4, 2007)

I may have to do the same. I still haven't taken a real good look at it. I've been hella lazy lately.


----------

