3SX or other non-OEM Custom Crank Pulley vibrations vs STOCK CRANK PULLEY smooth ???

[IPD]

My take is this. The benefits of a damper are undisputed. Is anyone even arguing otherwise? If Joe Blow asked me what he should install on his car, I would say a new OEM damper.

That being said, after a decade of running a solid with no unusual bearing wear, am I going to go swap my crank pulley? Nope. Will I change it the next time I pull the engine? Probably not. I'll probably install fresh bearings anyway. I don't expect my bearings to go 100k miles like stock at this power level.

So the argument for solid is basically as illogical as "I smoke and I don't have cancer", but on the other hand it's kinda like trying to tell a guy running 1.4 60's that he needs different tires... if it works it works.

the argument isn't presented for the people who have them, swear buy them, and won't likely use anything else. the argument is there for people who are inclined to take the anecdotal evidence of the few lucky ones as proof-positive.

[Intropy]

the argument isn't presented for the people who have them, swear buy them, and won't likely use anything else. the argument is there for people who are inclined to take the anecdotal evidence of the few lucky ones as proof-positive.

That's a good point. Everyone who chooses solid should be aware that they're making a conscious "bad" choice.

[BaadVR4]

Not a conscious bad choice, rather a conscious choice to take a risk which might not be advisable according to available evidence. There is a difference. And just because you haven't had a problem from torsional harmonic vibrations doesn't mean you won't have in the future. It's also possible you (or anyone operating an internal combustion engine in a car) will have serious damage from un-dampened torsional vibration and incorrectly ascribe the damage to something else.

The point is this: Mitsubishi (and every other automobile producer in the world) installs some form of torsional vibration damper on every one of their engines. They do so at a great expense compared to a simple solid pulley. They do so because the science tells them it's wise. They do so because the expense is a good investment compared to the $ to make warranty repairs if they didn't. Would every engine suffer catastrophic crankshaft failure if OEMs went to solid pulleys? No. But enough would fail to make installing the damper a cheaper alternative.

OP is discussing an OEM engine, not a highly modified set up with light weight pistons, special rods, etc, etc, etc. His question was whether he should replace the damper with an OEM unit or just put a solid pulley on. Comparing your car to his is almost like comparing apples to oranges.

But, to answer OP's question, all the science and the collective wisdom of all the automobile companies in the world says to put an OEM damper on.

And I do note you said you would advise an OEM damper and agree it has advantages. But your last comment in that post is another implication that because you have had no problems with a solid pulley there's not really a "need" for a damper.

That's a good point. Everyone who chooses solid should be aware that they're making a conscious "bad" choice.

[mb7050]

I just wish we would have more aftermarket options at reasonable cost

[BaadVR4]

Okay, from the top:

"I do remember the OP, I was actually the first one to post. Furthermore, the reason of my "sarcastic" tone is because I first posted in this thread in March I believe. This debate is not going to end, just as Forest Gump said. I never attacked anyone, you decided that you'd quote me & call me out for "directing my smart-ass" comments at you."

Here's your first post:

"You will not feel a solid pulley. Some people don't think the negative effects are substantial, while others wouldn't be caught dead without the OEM dampener.

I've yet to find indisputable evidence that proves solid pulleys will destroy cranks, so until I do I'm not going to bother swapping mine out."

When I posted, ample indisputable evidence had been presented in this thread showing undamped torsional vibrations will destroy crankshafts. I quoted your post and then cited two sources to prove my point. No attack on you. Simply a post in rebuttal of your original post.

As for "calling you out"/etc., I didn't do that until AFTER you posted this: "What happens when we run out of old OEM pulleys? I assume you're all going to be in line for the $1k aftermarket pulley?" You posted this AFTER my posting of evidence concerning torsional vibration issues AND a post by someone who is arguably an expert in the field supporting the use of a damper. How in the world would I NOT see this as a smart-assed comment aimed to ridicule anyone and everyone who advised OP to use a damper?

As for personally insulting me: You have. I'm insulted you would attempt to just blow off the evidence I and others presented as meaningless because your engine hasn't failed using a solid pulley.

As for "If I'm going to direct a post to someone, I'll quote them.": I did exactly that. I quoted you. Exactly and precisely. And I presented argument defending my conclusions regarding your intent and purpose in your posts. If I have mis-interpreted you in any way, feel free to correct me. Please also explain how my interpretations are incorrect.

As for "Feel free to talk down to me as If I know nothing, and am lesser than you. I will not stoop to your level for I have respect for you, Milt.": I have not, nor will I suggest you know less than I do, much less that you know nothing. Nor would I imply you are lesser than anyone. What I HAVE DONE is take you at your word. I have used your own words to make my argument. Again, I have yet to see a post addressing my specific issues with your posts or any explanation of where I was incorrect in my conclusions.

As for "It seems you do not see me in the same light, a shame really.": I agree. The entire situation is a shame, really. I guess I would just ask this of anyone who advises him to use a solid pulley: If he uses a solid pulley, then has a crankshaft failure related to torsional vibration issues, would you pay to repair the damage?

Here's an analogy: I smoked heavily for more than 20 years. I managed to quit nearly 40 years ago. I never got lung cancer. Should I advise someone to go ahead and smoke because I did and managed to avoid lung cancer? Probably not. But that's exactly analogous to what you're suggesting OP do: gamble that his engine won't be the one that fails. I consider that kind of advice irresponsible. If you want to take that risk with your engine, fine. But not with his.

I would like nothing more than a point by point explanation of each and every incorrect conclusion I have made. Please.

I do remember the OP, I was actually the first one to post. Furthermore, the reason of my "sarcastic" tone is because I first posted in this thread in March I believe. This debate is not going to end, just as Forest Gump said. I never attacked anyone, you decided that you'd quote me & call me out for "directing my smart-ass" comments at you

But I do appreciate you talking to me as If I have personally insulted you. If I'm going to direct a post to someone, I'll quote them.

Feel free to talk down to me as If I know nothing, and am lesser than you. I will not stoop to your level for I have respect for you, Milt.


It seems you do not see me in the same light, a shame really.

[BaadVR4]

Probably the wisest post in this entire thread. Absolutely true.

Here are some other absolutely true statements I have heard somewhere:

"In the end, it is inevitable that age and treachery will triumph over youth and enthusiasm"

"in the end, it is inevitable that superior skill and daring will triumph over shit house luck and superstition."

nope. headstrong & cheapskate always trumps research and the experience of others who have gone before.

[mb3000]

Okay, from the top:

"I do remember the OP, I was actually the first one to post. Furthermore, the reason of my "sarcastic" tone is because I first posted in this thread in March I believe. This debate is not going to end, just as Forest Gump said. I never attacked anyone, you decided that you'd quote me & call me out for "directing my smart-ass" comments at you."

Here's your first post:

"You will not feel a solid pulley. Some people don't think the negative effects are substantial, while others wouldn't be caught dead without the OEM dampener.

I've yet to find indisputable evidence that proves solid pulleys will destroy cranks, so until I do I'm not going to bother swapping mine out."

When I posted, ample indisputable evidence had been presented in this thread showing undamped torsional vibrations will destroy crankshafts. I quoted your post and then cited two sources to prove my point. No attack on you. Simply a post in rebuttal of your original post.

As for "calling you out"/etc., I didn't do that until AFTER you posted this: "What happens when we run out of old OEM pulleys? I assume you're all going to be in line for the $1k aftermarket pulley?" You posted this AFTER my posting of evidence concerning torsional vibration issues AND a post by someone who is arguably an expert in the field supporting the use of a damper. How in the world would I NOT see this as a smart-assed comment aimed to ridicule anyone and everyone who advised OP to use a damper?

As for personally insulting me: You have. I'm insulted you would attempt to just blow off the evidence I and others presented as meaningless because your engine hasn't failed using a solid pulley.

As for "If I'm going to direct a post to someone, I'll quote them.": I did exactly that. I quoted you. Exactly and precisely. And I presented argument defending my conclusions regarding your intent and purpose in your posts. If I have mis-interpreted you in any way, feel free to correct me. Please also explain how my interpretations are incorrect.

As for "Feel free to talk down to me as If I know nothing, and am lesser than you. I will not stoop to your level for I have respect for you, Milt.": I have not, nor will I suggest you know less than I do, much less that you know nothing. Nor would I imply you are lesser than anyone. What I HAVE DONE is take you at your word. I have used your own words to make my argument. Again, I have yet to see a post addressing my specific issues with your posts or any explanation of where I was incorrect in my conclusions.

As for "It seems you do not see me in the same light, a shame really.": I agree. The entire situation is a shame, really. I guess I would just ask this of anyone who advises him to use a solid pulley: If he uses a solid pulley, then has a crankshaft failure related to torsional vibration issues, would you pay to repair the damage?

Here's an analogy: I smoked heavily for more than 20 years. I managed to quit nearly 40 years ago. I never got lung cancer. Should I advise someone to go ahead and smoke because I did and managed to avoid lung cancer? Probably not. But that's exactly analogous to what you're suggesting OP do: gamble that his engine won't be the one that fails. I consider that kind of advice irresponsible. If you want to take that risk with your engine, fine. But not with his.

I would like nothing more than a point by point explanation of each and every incorrect conclusion I have made. Please.

As one of the group advocating use of a torsional vibration damper, I certainly do find BOTH your comments to be directed toward me personally.

As for "all this and all that", that attitude is inherent in the sarcastic tone of your comments. If you want to ignore ALL the available evidence, at your own peril, so be it. To attempt to ridicule those who are trying to give OP (remember HIM????) an accurate answer to his question is a display of exactly an "all this and all that" attitude: You want to make out as if you have some sort of advanced knowledge/wisdom that trumps more than a century of valid science/testing. You don't give a rat's ass about what could happen to OP if he follows your advice. You simply want to make yourself out as superior in some kind of way. I call.

Your answers to those who actually DO have education/training/experience in the field under discussion are clever witticisms, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. You have nothing of value to add to the discussion, so you try to attack those who do.

If you meant your second post to be a legitimate concern, then selecting a different set of words might have conveyed your intentions better. You could have said "Does anyone know how available the OEM dampers will be in the future?" The answer is the OEM damper is used on every 6G72 engine Mitsu makes. And that engine continues in production today. Perhaps in different platforms, but still in production nonetheless. And, when it does become unavailable, I suspect there will be a greater effort to find a suitable replacement in the after market arena. No, your second comment was couched in terms of derision toward those who support the need for some damper of some kind. "What happens when we run out of old OEM pulleys? I assume you're all going to be in line for the $1k aftermarket pulley?". Notice the reference to "you're all going to be..."? Hard to think you were expressing a legitimate concern since you excluded yourself (and, by inference, all who agree with your position) from the comment/question.

I stand on my statements in post 141.

You also took a stab at my presumed financial status:

Nah, some of us will be looking for the $ to fix the carnage from our first shattered crankshaft. And another solid pulley. LOL.

My "issue" you could say with all of this is that you decided to call me out on my comments, never mind the others who posted in favor for the solid pulley. As you can see with my first and latter posts, I never suggested the OP to run a solid pulley. I never advocated for or against, I simply stated that on my engine I decided to run the solid pulley.

[FeaRpb]

So uhhhhh stock pulley...

Post via Tapatalk

[BaadVR4]

You also took a stab at my presumed financial status:
My "issue" you could say with all of this is that you decided to call me out on my comments, never mind the others who posted in favor for the solid pulley. As you can see with my first and latter posts, I never suggested the OP to run a solid pulley. I never advocated for or against, I simply stated that on my engine I decided to run the solid pulley.

MB 3000:

"Originally Posted by BaadVR4
Nah, some of us will be looking for the $ to fix the carnage from our first shattered crankshaft. And another solid pulley. LOL."

How is this related to YOUR financial status (presumed or otherwise)? I said "some of us", which is the same group you addressed in this post:

"What happens when we run out of old OEM pulleys? I assume you're all going to be in line for the $1k aftermarket pulley?".

"....you're all going...." didn't include you. My use of "....some of us...." refers to the same group as "....you're all...." Since you were not part of the "....you're all...." group, you aren't part of the "....some of us...." group, either.

So, my conclusions about the nature of your posts is accurate, but my characterization of your comments is incorrect? Please quote your own posts (and mine, if appropriate) and explain how your words should be interpreted differently than I have done.

I called you out on your posts because of the nature of your comments. Yes, others have posted in support of solid pulleys. They didn't deny there was evidence that solid pulleys could be hazardous to an engine's health. Nor did they ridicule the information/evidence presented by those who advised running a damper.

"In the real world, your car would be fine." Post #23 on 3/11/2012 in response to OP asking if a particular amount/pattern of driving on the highway would cause damage. Pretty clear you are telling him his car would be fine in the real world with a solid pulley. If that isn't advocating he use a solid pulley, what is it?

"I've yet to find indisputable evidence that proves solid pulleys will destroy cranks, so until I do I'm not going to bother swapping mine out." And what did you say when the "indisputable evidence" was presented to you in this thread (by others and me)? You posted about putting a damper on when you shattered a crank. You asked if "you're all" going to line up for $1k dampers". And, when I made a joke in answer to your question, you took it as a "personal insult". There were at least 4 posts ( 20,33,79, 115) made PRIOR to your "I'll swap back to OEM after I shatter a crank." post. If all you wanted was "indisputable evidence", why did you not only ignore it but ridicule it when it was presented to you?

Again, as in my previous post, I ask you to quote your and my posts with an explanation of where and how I have been incorrect. Please.

[CoopKill]

Come on guys, let it rest...