would it be ok to use this on a gsr motor?

 

Yes. Been running it for years with no problems.

 

so it would be ok to use this on a 1.8L motor even though it was made for a 1.6L motor? im just trying to clarify this before i buy it.

 

yes

 

I don't know what the big thing is about the CTR pulley. I have a genuine CTR pulley that came on my JDM CTR motor and it is just slightly smaller in TOTAL size than a GSR pulley. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE EVERYONE IS SO HYPED UP OVER???

 

because its from the CTR so it must be great right? The extra 2hp IMO is not worth the risk you run of shatering your oil pump gears and blowing your motor up but thats just me

 

I agree...If you want to lighten up your rotating assembly then put a lighter flywheel on instead...

 

Why not get both?

2hp for bolting on a pully sounds pretty good to me. I agree that technically you sould be balancing the entire rotating assembly in accordance to the lightned flywheel and pulley modifications but like I said I've been running my lightned flywheel and ctr pully for years and have not had one issue.

 

The entire point behind a flywheel is conservation of energy...Does anyone else here believe you can go too far with lightening the rotating assembly??? There's also the driveability issue. If I'm driving a car on a daily basis, I don't want it to be a pain is a$$ to drive...Just my opinion. Others may feel differently.

 

There is a significant weight savings over the GSR pulley.

From what I have researched the elastomer is more for reducing in cabin noise (NVH) on Hondas and most other modern cars. It's not actually a Harmonic Balancer like you would see on a older V8. I think that the pulley being well balanced is much more important.

And lightening can definitely be overdone. Especially on a street car. The increase in throttle response is nice but engine speed will also fall faster making time between shifts a little cumbersome.

 

i am not getting this pulley just to get it. i just bought a gsr block and it was missing the pulley so i decided to get some feedback on what you guys thought about that particular pulley.

 

What's the origin of NVH? Why didn't Honda use dampers on all of their engines?

 

I bought my ctr pulley cause it was a cheap upgrade and plus its a single belt pulley. I'm not running ac so I didn't need the extra.

I would recommend using a Fluidamper before a ctr one if ur going for power though.

Just my .02 cents.

 

NVH stands for Noise Vibration and Harshness. According to some of the reading I've done it originates in the engine and drivetrain. They then can be transfered to other parts of the car through points of contact. Metal generally transfers noise and vibrations much better than rubber (elastomer). So the idea is the noise is suppresed when it gets to the rubber layer.

As far as I know Honda used dampers on all most all of there engines. An exception I know of is the B16B. This is a very performance oriented engine and NVH probably wasn't as big of a concern. Something else to consider.... According to some researchers at Harvard, some manufacturers increase NVH to "increase driver exhilaration". Check out the link NVH Research
Maybe that's what Honda was after in the Civic Type R??

 

So, honda engineered a pulley that shatters oil pump gears and blows motors up? That's not like them! Tell us why and where you attained your information please.

 

The CTR pulley should not shatter oil pump gears or damage bearings when used on the engine for which it was designed. However, that does not mean it's suitable for all applications. An engine that has a longer stroke, operates at higher speeds, and/or produces a lot of torque should have a damper if longevity is a concern.

OEM dampers are tuned to cancel the most severe vibrations, at the engine's first critical speed. They are not designed to damp vibrations at all speeds, since only the critical speeds (harmonics) are the issue. As far as the NVH argument goes, if you can notice vibrations while sitting in the car, so can the engine block...

 

you know whats hilarious?

people will sit and bitch about putting a lighter pulley on the end of their crank, and the next day theyll put an 8lb, 100 dollar "fidanza" flywheel on the other end of their crank.

sometimes i swear the "sheep" dont even think, they just respond with whatever they read in another thread.

please, call up honda and tell them to recall every B16B they ever made. all the "oil pump gears are going to shatter" lololol

 

That would only be an issue if you're replacing a dual-mass flywheel. Weight and balancing are not the concerns, damping is.

 

Yes, I agree that is true. But, how does that disprove anything? I am not trying to be argumentative. I would like to hear why you feel the way you do so that I can draw my own conclusions. You seem to be knowledgeable and I am open to other ideas as long as they are backed up with facts. Nothing is written in stone.

 

There's nothing wrong with debate, as long as it's civil.

I wish I could tell you the natural frequencies of different engines, but I can't. Even better, I wish I could show you graphs of noise vs. engine speed for different crank pulleys and different engines. Unfortunately, I've never found anything like that for our engines.

My view on the subject is based on material in SAE papers, books, etc. I'm also basing it on the physics concepts that I've been force-fed for the past few years. If the damping ratio of the system is low, there is going to be a lot of noise at its natural frequency. When things vibrate like that, they tend to fatigue quickly.

I'm also open to ideas, but I haven't seen a strong case for the other side of the argument. Whatever the case, until somebody spends the time and money to measure the vibrations of different Honda I4's (and shares it), we'll continue having these threads.

 

I found a very good article on the subject. Here's the link Damper Article After reading through the article I must say It's hard to refute the idea that the ring is there to dampen torsional vibrations. I think you're probably right that it is the elastomers purpose. There is also an example of a torsion map. (Its of a V8 though) It clearly shows the peaks in harmonic disturbance. One thing I am a little unclear on is how exactly that ring of rubber does it's job. I understand the harmonic disturbances and why they happen. I just can't clearly picture how they can be held at bay by the damper.

 

The rubber absorbs the harmonics. When you absorb harmonics it has a dampening effect. Your rubber engine mounts absorb/dampen the engine vibration/harmonics. It's the same idea really.

 

I understand how it absorbs the harmonics leaving the crank that would otherwise travel through the car. What I don't understand is how it can suppress harmonics within the crank itself that come from uneven torque pulses.

 

It doesn't absorb harmonics leaving the crank that would otherwise travel through the car, that's what the engine mounts control/do. The harmonic balancer is on the end of the crank itself which is how it absorbs harmonics traveling through the crank. Take a tuning fork and place small rubber caps on the ends of the fork and then bang it. See if it sounds the same as without the caps.

 

I understand that rubber mounts dampen vibrations. But the purpose of the elastomer in the balancer is at least two fold. 1: to dampen torsional vibrations and 2: noise reduction. It was stated in the article I posted above. It was also stated elsewhere in other reading I have done, I can find the links if you like.

However your example did help me visualize how the idea works. Thank you sir. However, wouldn't the mains isolate parts of the crank from the dampening effect of the damper? Or, would that be wrong due to the fact the crank doesn't actually ride on the mains but on a layer of oil?