How are the "new" Eagle cranks working out?

[gunzandgearz]

Sounds like your on rhe right track, that's exactly how I do them if they will spin nice and easy ought to be good.Is there anyone else that sells rotating assemblies besides scat or eagle, I have a cola crank childs and albert rods and venolia pistons in my stroked 69 chevelle, haven't had much luck with the scats or eagles for customers engines ive built seems like they aren't balanced properly or aren't within spec or something, never just an install and go.

 

[Mike T]

Is there anyone else that sells rotating assemblies besides scat or eagle

In the past you could get a balanced rotating assembly with chamfered bearings from Dan @ DLS. I believe now that his assemblies are only available when he builds an engine for you (call him to confirm this).

FWIW when my stage II is built my choice will most likely be a Crower crank and rods with CP pistons. I would think you could buy this same combo through TA performance as a balanced assembly. The cost would probably be between 5 and 6k..... so for a 109 build the other options that are available through a number of venders on this board start to look really good again.

 

[gunzandgearz]

Thanks for the info mike, ill try to call Dan and see if still available, if not looks like eagle or scat I guess just haven't had much luck with them for customer builds although they were chevy builds not buick, not that they were just trash, just that they weren't in balance and had to add some Mallory metal, which isn't cheap as I always internal balance my engines. Anyway thanks for the info and good luck with your build.

 

[Mike T]

Update on the crank. Over all I would purchase again but it did have a few quirks that was discussed with Eagle and hopefully those were addressed by now.

I feel as if the snout was .001 too small which made the BHJ balancer a slip fit (not pressed as it should be) stock hub was really loose.
Would be nice to have the key slot start at the end of the crank for aligning press on balancer/hub. Two of the flex plate holes were not indexed quite right so elongation of the JW flexplate was required (was a precise fit on stock crank). Now that it's up and running and there is a leak at the rear main seal I would say the the knurling is too aggressive...at least on mine it was.


Now this is where I could use some feedback. Mine is the external balanced version and was really surprised that it took 100 grams (200 total) removed from the counter weights to go 36.6 ?? I'm running H&R motor/trans mounts and it feels decent as far as vibration goes so I'm thinking balance job was correct.

Has anyone went 36.6 on the external unit and removed a similar amount ?

I remember Nick M. saying that removing 100 grams from the counterweights of the original "internal" Eagles to make them "external".

 

[bison]

Update on the crank. Over all I would purchase again but it did have a few quirks that was discussed with Eagle and hopefully those were addressed by now.

I feel as if the snout was .001 too small which made the BHJ balancer a slip fit (not pressed as it should be) stock hub was really loose.
Would be nice to have the key slot start at the end of the crank for aligning press on balancer/hub. Two of the flex plate holes were not indexed quite right so elongation of the JW flexplate was required (was a precise fit on stock crank). Now that it's up and running and there is a leak at the rear main seal I would say the the knurling is too aggressive...at least on mine it was.


Now this is where I could use some feedback. Mine is the external balanced version and was really surprised that it took 100 grams (200 total) removed from the counter weights to go 36.6 ?? I'm running H&R motor/trans mounts and it feels decent as far as vibration goes so I'm thinking balance job was correct.

Has anyone went 36.6 on the external unit and removed a similar amount ?

I remember Nick M. saying that removing 100 grams from the counterweights of the original "internal" Eagles to make them "external".

The issues you mentioned are pretty much normal though I've still to experience a loose damper. That's totally unacceptable and makes it useless without correcting. Could be nickel plated and ground to diameter. The flexplate hole location issue is the same as it's been since mid 2000's. Knurling almost always too aggressive unless it's been sanded down. Did you have to clean up the pilot to flange radius for your flexplate to sit flat? I've had to on everyone unless it was bought from a vendor that performed that work prior. External balance would require lightening the counterweights. They came with large drill holes out of the box if external. I'd rather have to remove metal than add it if balancing. These cranks aren't worth the aggravation unless you know well before hand they require a lot of extra work and access to a machine shop to fix. The journals have been good on the 4340 3.625" cranks I've used recently. Though at one time they sucked on all and needed .010"/.010" to make them perfect. It's too bad they can't fix the issues they have with their product but you will get what you're paying for that's for sure


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mike T]

Yes the snout was small and I didn't want to send it back. Thought of a number of ways to solve the problem and decided to knurle the ID of the balancer on the lathe. The flange was machined nicely to accept the flexplate. This crank was the more expensive version with the counterweights cut down specifically for external balance. With the extra cost I kind of expected it not to need so much weight removed. Maybe they were shooting for a 4.1 balanced @ 50%?

 

[Ken Adams]

subscribed

 

[Mike T]

subscribed

Not sure how much more input we're going to get....trying to share all I know to date. As stated many times I'm using the external version (cost considerably more) because I already had the BHJ external balancer and JW wheel, would have went internal otherwise.

Have spun it 6300 + and seems to be good vibration wise so maybe the 200 grams was the correct amount to be removed.

 

[Mike T]

Three years later and i would purchase this crank again. Only real complaints is that the knurl was too deep and it causes oil to seep at the rear seal and the snout was .001 under which I hope was corrected by now.

 

[BEATAV8]

Three years later and i would purchase this crank again. Only real complaints is that the knurl was too deep and it causes oil to seep at the rear seal and the snout was .001 under which I hope was corrected by now.

I used one of the more recent GN1 3.625 cranks which they stopped putting the knurl on them. The snout was tight with a bhj balancer.

 

[Mr.Spool]

so all is really good with these cranks?how do they look when the motor is refreshed?

 

[Gene Van Horn]

Ive had mine in the car for 3 years, running great no need to refresh. Will see in bowling how strong it is.

 

[Mike T]

so all is really good with these cranks?how do they look when the motor is refreshed?

Hope not to tear into the bottom end again for a long time, if I do I'll update.
At install the journal measurements were very good if not perfect. Far better than a stock crank that I had cut .010-.010 locally.

If they have corrected the small issues that I've pointed out in previous post it's a great value.

 

[Mr.Spool]

Hope not to tear into the bottom end again for a long time, if I do I'll update.
At install the journal measurements were very good if not perfect. Far better than a stock crank that I had cut .010-.010 locally.

If they have corrected the small issues that I've pointed out in previous post it's a great value.

im glad your doing well with it.i do hear other thingseasy on the stock crank i had them over 90lbs/minute with alot of time