Any one done a Balance Shaft Delete?

Just looking for your opinions on this, NVH -power , any negatives you can think of.

I was thinking of just gutting the carrier to keep the baffling effect on the oilpan and whatever structural rigidity it adds to the block. Has anyone else done this and did you need to block the oil passage somehow? or do you recommend one of the balance shaft delete kits (Looks like just a plug and a screw).

I was just thinking of having my mechanic close the oiling hole on the carrier with a welder.

I know of many people how have done this on Mazdaspeed motors. It adds NVH because that is the entire point of the balance shaft. Everybody I know buys the delete kit and removes the entire carrier to get rid of the weight. Delete kits run about $35 USD. After the delete you will have to fill the oil pan with more oil because removing the carrier allows for more volume.

do you really want that for a street car? This car has bad enough vibration compared to an 8 or 6 cylinder. Under 1500rpm you can feel it, at least on a manual. An automatic is going to keep you out of that high vibration area more.

Just bought the plug piece. My curiosity got the best of me. Would be a good opportunity to examine the bottom end.

Give me till the end of the week and I'll tell you exactly what it feels like on my new one. I debated leaving the carrier in and gutting it, much like you, but decided against it to drop weight. These motors are very similar to the Mazda MZR motors and loads of people have deleted them without much worry on the NVH part. I haven't noticed an increase in the EBMs that I've rode in, but again, that's not spending an exorbitant time in them. Also, for what it's worth, the 2.3 has a very nice main girdle setup. Given the way that the carriage is designed, I don't think it'd add as much rigidity as you'd think.

In regards to your comment about the using the balance shaft carriage (BSC) as a baffle or windage tray of sorts, as long as you add the proper amount of oil to the oil pan, you shouldn't have any concerns about oiling. I too would have liked to have had a solution for a windage tray, and they do have a somewhat tiny one inside, but I didn't know what kind of effect gutting the carriage would have on oil pressure and didn't want that to cause problems. I have a carriage assembly sitting in the garage and have wanted to disassemble it, but I just haven't had the time yet due to trying to get the V going again.

People criticize me for advocating keeping an extra 40 lbs of rotating mass off the wheels...the whole balance shaft assembly weighs about 18 lbs to my knowledge including the carriage. I would think it's not worth the trouble on a street car or the added NHV.

I'm with arghx on this one. I thought about doing that but when I started to get the details of what I was actually removing (mass wise) I realized it wouldn't' make any meaningful difference on anything but a an actual track car and even then I think it's intended to be one of many similar modifications working in concert such as ultra light weight forged 18" wheels, low mass drive shaft, gutted interior etc.

Those are all things when combined make a significant difference but individually are more or less completely useless on a street car.

If for nothing else than the potential added margin of safety as Juben had discussed in the blown engine thread.

TheLion said:

People criticize me for advocating keeping an extra 40 lbs of rotating mass off the wheels...the whole balance shaft assembly weighs about 18 lbs to my knowledge including the carriage. I would think it's not worth the trouble on a street car or the added NHV.

I'm with arghx on this one. I thought about doing that but when I started to get the details of what I was actually removing (mass wise) I realized it wouldn't' make any meaningful difference on anything but a an actual track car and even then I think it's intended to be one of many similar modifications working in concert such as ultra light weight forged 18" wheels, low mass drive shaft, gutted interior etc.

Those are all things when combined make a significant difference but individually are more or less completely useless on a street car.

Click to expand...

arghx7 said:

do you really want that for a street car? This car has bad enough vibration compared to an 8 or 6 cylinder. Under 1500rpm you can feel it, at least on a manual. An automatic is going to keep you out of that high vibration area more.

Click to expand...

This is one of the quietest smoothest cars I have owned, the added nvh is nothing compared to my catless pipe and sport suspension.

I sure do miss my previous Rotary, but my other 4 cyl. were much smoother than this one, however I do understand that this is a larger displacement than my previous ones.

Glenn G said:

This is one of the quietest smoothest cars I have owned, the added nvh is nothing compared to my catless pipe and sport suspension.

Click to expand...

Juben said:

I too would have liked to have had a solution for a windage tray,

Click to expand...

You mean like this? https://www.mountuneusa.com/2-0L-2-3L-Complete-EcoBoost-Oil-Control-System-p/2536-oc-aa.htm

Isn't that FWD application only? There are fairly cheap FWD baffle kits out.

MustangMustHaves said:

You mean like this? https://www.mountuneusa.com/2-0L-2-3L-Complete-EcoBoost-Oil-Control-System-p/2536-oc-aa.htm

Click to expand...

MustangMustHaves said:

You mean like this? https://www.mountuneusa.com/2-0L-2-3L-Complete-EcoBoost-Oil-Control-System-p/2536-oc-aa.htm

Click to expand...

That's for the FoRS 2.3. The tray flange appears to be the same (as it should) but the design of the lower portion of the pan is different between a transverse and longitudinal layout. Trust me, I checked on it with a couple of different vendors.

Oh right. Didn't even notice it came with the pan. I thought it was just the plate you'd buy.

TheLion said:

People criticize me for advocating keeping an extra 40 lbs of rotating mass off the wheels...the whole balance shaft assembly weighs about 18 lbs to my knowledge including the carriage. I would think it's not worth the trouble on a street car or the added NHV.

I'm with arghx on this one. I thought about doing that but when I started to get the details of what I was actually removing (mass wise) I realized it wouldn't' make any meaningful difference on anything but a an actual track car and even then I think it's intended to be one of many similar modifications working in concert such as ultra light weight forged 18" wheels, low mass drive shaft, gutted interior etc.

Those are all things when combined make a significant difference but individually are more or less completely useless on a street car.

Click to expand...

the 18 lbs that low isn't much to be sure, it's the extra mass of the balance shafts the crank has to accelerate and decelerate to twice crank speed (14,000 rpm:eyebulge that give you the benefit.

NVH does not appear to be a problem look at this video i found on the FoRS forum.

[ame]


Lastly my research is pointing to this possibly being the cause of failure on un-tuned engines. I have been wracking my brain trying to figure out why it is usually rod #3 that goes, a batch of bad rods would be spread over all 4, so would LSPI, same for bad injectors causing lean conditions. But lets say you are gently leaving a stop as most of the failures seem to indicate so you accelerate from idle (800 rpm)to 4000 rpm. the balance shafts, (there are 2) have to zing from 1600 rpm to 8000 in that same amount of time. if it drags for 1 milisecond the number 3 rod gets all of the load (the crank shaft flexing and moving in the bearings will mitigate it somewhat for the further cylinders). #3 is actually part of the ring gear carrier and can never move enough to absorb a sudden change of forces.





All of this is pure theory but I have been trolling the MS3 forums for a case of an engine with a BSD failing (When not doing something stupid) and can't find any.

I know 3 MS3 owners here in Germany one had an engine blow on a conservative tune. Mazda did warranty the engine which was nice. The other two have been on upgraded turbos for 2 or 3 years and still running strong. Guess what they removed early? I've been in all three cars and cant really tell a difference (the big turbo cars are significantly louder but It mostly feels like Exhaust booming to me).

The BS carrier does not have fitted bearings like the Crankshaft, it relies purely on the oil film and the loose tolerances. This is insane for a part that has to rev like it does!

This is all anecdotal evidence and I may possibly be wrong but It's coming out of my car as soon as I can manage it. Not many times that you can remove a point of failure and increase power for basically free.

I've deleted BS from multiple 4G63's which is a 2.0 DOHC turbo Mitsubishi engine. I've noticed no NVH over the years. The BS setup in those engines like to eat the bearings because of the speed and off-balance weight that's slinging around at warp speed. Main reason to delete those BS is for reliability. Seems like I'll eventually go the same route on this 2.3 if this plausible theory is proven.