Quote
Quote
I suppose the question is why eliminate them? the cons out weigh the pros...

Actually, the pros outweigh the cons.

I come from the 4G63 community, where the balance shafts are spun by a small belt which rides on the crank pulley behind the timing belt. When the balance shaft belt fails, it typically takes the timing belt with it, resulting in piston-to-valve contact, resulting in a set of very expensive ash trays. On the 4G54, the balance shafts are spun by a chain in front of the timing belt, but since I didn't properly time them when I put the engine back together a couple months back, they're out of sync and are creating more vibration than normal. Being a 25 year old riding lawn mower with a windshield and doors, I'm not worried about "NVH," but I would like to ensure all the nuts and bolts on the thing stay nice and tight. No telling what could happen over time with this kind of vibration. I have to go in there anyway, might as well reduce moving parts.

A reduction in complexity is always a good bet. Removing them means less parts to fail. It also means less rotating mass (I suspect they weigh between 10-20lbs altogether), which makes the already underpowered lump a bit more lively.


Yeah, it still does not make sense why you would eliminate them. Just because it can be modified, doesn't mean it is an improvement.


Spence
1985 Mitsubishi PU 2.3 Turbo Diesel, 13" lift, Watercooled turbo, 4D56 Head, Atlas II,Fox Coilovers, Elockers,

1983 Mitsubishi PU 2.5 Turbo Diesel 4x4, fully restored

2003 G500, sliders, beadlocks, roofrack, ladder etc.