To Robert and the other volks following the
"power rebuild" thread:
I do find the idea of counter balancing the crankshaft
on the 2.1 l wasserboxer intriguing.
So maybe instead of changing gear ratios or wheel sizes,
one can make the engine more "rev happy".
On my 90 westy auto. 65 mph equals about 3800 rpm.
My vanagon will cruise at this speed without complaining
all day long, all the way from Oly. to LA and back.
But any higher and I definitely notice a sharp increase in
vibrations and noise emanating from the engine.
The thing is, there is lots of reserve power.
At 65 the accelerator is only about 1/2 way down.
(on level ground with no headwind and 48 psi in the tires)
If I floor it, the van can easily cruise at 85 mph,
but the complaining from the wasserboxer becomes
unbearable.
So if a counterbalanced crank reduces the vibrations
and noise from the engine at high rpm operation,
(3500 to 4500), it definitely would be worth it.
Especially if you don't want to reduce
the gear ratios or wheel size, since that would
compromise acceleration and climbing ability.  Imho

Harald
90 westy
Olympia WA

Robert Lilley wrote:
>  It balances the mass from the pistons rotating. Smooths out the engine.
>  True the 2.1L does not move as much as the bug case, But I have heard of
> 2.1L cranks breaking in the center and for $150 extra the insurance and
> smoothing out of the engine was, IMHO worth it.  Plus with a stock four
> speed tranny turning at 4000 RPMS at 70 it will help.
>
> Plus, Why do High Performance engines have counterweight cranks?
>
>
> Robert