JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Alright, so I had purchased a cheap-o 3-jaw puller to remove the balancer. The bolt wasn't even close to being long enough and quite honestly, I was VERY worried about cross-threading the crankshaft because of the quality of the bolt included.

So, instead of buying even more tools, I decided to be redneck. This will probably be the only time I don't air on the side of caution for the build, but it seemed like it would work, so I tried it.

I took an old crappy 3/8" deep socket I had and decided to butt it up against the snout of the crank (it would have been better if it were bigger than 3/4" or better quality but alas). I figured the way the tool worked the 3 puller arms would literally pull along the bolt as I tightened it, which was to be anchored into the crankshaft. Or I could press against the snout of the crank and tighten the bolt and have the jaws pull that way.

I decided to try that. In retrospect, I probably should have put some flat washers against it and it would have worked no problem, but I didn't realize the force needed to remove the balancer.

Here are the pics. In the first, you see my ghettofabulous setup.



Here I am torquing on the bolt. I had to use a breaker bar on my 1/2" drive. I should have known this would be bad.



But it pulled the pulley right off. And no damage to the crankshaft threads.



But, I chewed up the end of the snout. Now, the balancer bolts fits without issue and the old balancer came right off and actually lines back up easily over the snout. It's just grooved right on the very tip. Will this affect the balance of the crank at all? I figure, the balancer is right there, so any issue this would cause would be masked by the balancer itself. Also, very little material was actually taken out. I could always take it to a machine shop and let them lathe the other end of the snout to balance it or add some metal somewhere if necessary. Thoughts?

dr_whigham

iTrader: (49)

I had to do the exact same thing, but damn. It didn't do that.

I'd just smooth it off and roll with it. There's no way the dust you'd turn that bit of a lip into would even weigh anything.

Just my opinion.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

That's what I'm figuring. I think because the bit was cheapo it didn't have a nice rolled edge like some of my others. Again a couple of flat washers there would have been better. Next time I do it I'll do that.

A.R. Shale Targa

iTrader: (2)

Man Jake you are missing a perfectly good opportunity to convince the wife
that the crankshaft is now ruined because of the crappy puller tool and NOW
the ONLY solution is a new forged 4" stroke rotating assembly.......

dr_whigham

iTrader: (49)

BOOM. That just happened.

There's a few rotating assemblies in the classifieds right now... Just saying...

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Trust me. Subliminally I might be trying to blow this **** up. I REALLY don't want to put a 145k shortblock in there... Given everything else I have. I think a 383 would work well. I'll just retard the cam 3-4 degrees and it'll work perfect with a 383...

A.R. Shale Targa

iTrader: (2)

INNER GEARHEAD STRUGGLE (whatever shall I do ??)
...says Hello Lunati; it's Jake...sure my MC,VI,DS card numbers are....
................this is gonna be great................
My wife will be....and she'll probably want to....and..
MEANWHILE:
.................all of us jackasses are goin'
POOR JAKE IS NOW......and...

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

lol..

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Ah dammit. I have a bead on a set of Eagle 6.200" H-Beam rods and JE Forged 3.905" pistons. Now, if I can find a 4" stroker crank for a decent price, I'll just rebuild my 346 here locally as a 383...

And I found some Fikse FM/10s that look gorgeous... gunmetal with polished lips.

I'm going to go bankrupt. Ha!

Pharcyde50

iTrader: (11)

Works a lot better if you use about a 6" long ratchet extension in the crank snout when using the puller. I think you'll be fine though. I pulled my 346 for a freshen up and ended up with a forged 370

Always2Slow

iTrader: (8)

Is this car running yet? Don't waste your time with a 383 better off with a 4" bore variety. Hell sell everything and dump a ls3 in it will make more power.

The_Bishop

iTrader: (10)

On a quick note: You are having issues with your impact guns because you air line is too small. You cannot feed an impact gun with a 1/4" air line. It will *never* have the torque it's supposed to have.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

Yes! Finally! Going big!

427zm

iTrader: (9)

What so you think it'll do?

My guess 520+....

Blackbird-WS6

iTrader: (15)

yea something dont sounds right in that video. either your air compressor doesnt make enough cfm to fun that impact or the impact itself is a POS. sounds very weak.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Yeah, I need to buy another line - need to get a 3/8 which is what the impact calls for. I was just borrowing that one from the neighbor. And the tank is rated at 4CFM @ 90PSI... the gun is rated at 700ft-lbs at 6CFM@90... so I'm not getting the full 700, but it should still be better than 200-300 I would think.

383 is fine. Especially if I can get it put together for under 2k, which would be my goal.

dr_whigham

iTrader: (49)

Yet again, similar ideas / goals... Only issue I'm fighting now is everyone telling me to get a 6.0 block and go 4.070 with it if it passes sonic checking.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

And I'd agree. Read the "Bore v Stroke" section of the article.

http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/te...s/viewall.html

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

More bore will make more power. No doubt.

But I think my heads/cam + 383 would be in the 490-500rwhp/460-470rwtq range. A lot of 408s don't do that because of shitty components and poor setup. Plus a 383 is lighter.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

Yep. Jake, I know you're set, I was putting it out there for Whigham. Dr. if you have the chance to increase bore, do. It.