Counterweighted crank

You don't even know enough about balancing to have fun with That statement (and the other you just posted above this) is just a jumble of words you have heard somebody in the balancing room say and assembled them into senseless BS.

 

For you and the ones that might be confused by your foolishness, here is balance primer 101 so at least next time you dont make a total fool of yourself. We are going to use a single cylinder engine here for simplicity but the math and terms cross to others

What makes the engine vibrate and thus the need of something to balance it is two things not one. Rotating weight which is a circular vibration and non-rotating weight such as the piston. The rotating weight is easy, you place a weight, aka counter weight opposite and problem solved.  Now there is two problems left here. The piston is going back and forth causing a vibration in line with the bore and you have the rod which is what??? It is neither in total. The pin end of the rod is more or less non-rotating and the big end is more or less rotating, Since the entire balancing job must be done on the crank how are you going to counteract the piston??. Huh?? The piston go up and down and your balance weight go round and round Pank???

 The answer is compromise, or in balancing lingo "percentage". You cancel out part of the piston but not all of it or the engine will simply vibrate in a 90 degree angle to how it vibrated when unbalanced. The bob weight whose purpose you totally butchered is nothing more than a calculated weight used to balance the engine. Is not some number you shoot for when building the engine. It is the total of the rotating weight, plus a percentage of the non-reciprocating weight added to it.  This would be the bob weight which is hung on the rod journal and you balance by adding weight opposite aka counterweight. So naturally when a smart builder uses the lightest components that will hold up to his use the weight of the bob used to balance the engine will be lighter. An under balanced engine (by percentage) will vibrate inline with the bore, an over balanced engine (by percentage) will vibrate perpendicular to the bore and this even changes with RPM once you are close. Somewhere in between is the best we can do. Obviously this is many feet above your level of understanding Pank but maybe others will benefit. 

What WI50 is saying is with no counterweights on the inline 6 you must transfer all of these forces through the crank to the piston that is going in the opposite direction. In the case of number 1 that would be number 6 Pank, all the way at the other end. #2 is countered by #5 and #3 by #4. Isnt hard to see why at his HP levels that would twist and break cranks. Wasnt it you who just today said that timing at individual cylinders was like the holy grail of found power?? Now you say it is better to use the crank as a torsion bar to balance the engine than to balance it at each cylinder and eliminate the twist??? Please make up your mind and argue one way or the other I get dizy easily. The builder you mention and most others will mention a bob weight because they don't want the counterweights added to or subtracted from excessively and compromising the crank, this is why they offer several bob weight ranges in popular strokes. If you are building the entire engine in the shop like Marty you simply design the crank weights around the parts that make to power, not the other way around,

 One of these days, maybe,,if you ever build engine #2 and get your head out where the sun shines. You will learn that what you learned on #1 does not apply across all engines, all applications, all HP and all configurations,,,, , Remember #1 went 5 runs and KABOOM!!!!