<VV> Rod caps and balancing

[D. Barry Ellison]

I would vote against it.  Due to dropped valve seats damaging pistons which I could not acquire replacements at the time, I assembled an engine with 4 pistons of one type, and 2 of another, with the 2 odd ones at #3 and #4, all .040 over.  I don't remember how much they're off from the other 4, (seems about 60 grams, but I honestly don't remember).  Balanced pistons and rods individually L vs R.  

Over 5k, the motor vibrates my teeth smooth.  She used to rev to 6k rev limited.  That was the only change, no change in clutch/flywheel/balancer, etc.   Under 5k, she seems fine.  I drive her all the time and hit 5k every once in a while, just to see if it's still there.  Kind of like an old movie - the ending never changes.  I will drive her this way til she grenades.  Wanna see the carnage?  I plan on going to Indy, but I won't push her too hard.

BarryE in SC
2 lates, 2 earlies, 2 many projects, and no garage, but I'm trying.


> Subject:  Rod caps and balancing
>
> Bob (and anyone else)
>
> I didn't know that Chevy balanced the rods only in pairs but thinking about
> the design of our "boxer" engines, I understand why. Is it possible to do as
> Chevy did when balancing our rods for performance and just pay attention to
> pairs or is there a possible harmonic problem? ..... or other issue?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Dave
> 1960 Vette; 1961 Rampside; 1962 Rampside; 1964 Spyder coupe; 1965 Greenbrier;
> 1966 Corsa Turbo Coupe; 1967 Nova SS; 1968 Camaro ragtop
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~