Dynamic Tire Balancing - but, not Dyna Beads
#21
02-27-2014, 12:46 PM
Tourer
Just wanted to give a quick update...
The more miles I put on, the more I like how these work. Smoother ride, better cornering - and, while I know it's not the smartest thing to do, I was able to ride for over 4 miles with no hands on the bars; straight as an arrow with not even a minor correction needed. Road snakes, pebbles & cracks deflected the wheel, but it self-corrected almost instantly. I have to presume it's the balancers, because I can tell you that did not happen before having them installed.
The more miles I put on, the more I like how these work. Smoother ride, better cornering - and, while I know it's not the smartest thing to do, I was able to ride for over 4 miles with no hands on the bars; straight as an arrow with not even a minor correction needed. Road snakes, pebbles & cracks deflected the wheel, but it self-corrected almost instantly. I have to presume it's the balancers, because I can tell you that did not happen before having them installed.
Presuming for a moment dynamic balancers such as these worked, the movable weights would stay in one location relative to the wheel, and that's the location opposite the heavier side (since being anywhere else would increase imbalance), effectively making them fixed and therefore providing no benefit over fixed weights for this purpose.
The original argument for them was that (hypothetically) they would move elsewhere over the long term (many thousands of miles) as the tires wear to account for a shifting in the heaviest point of the wheel/tire combo. Over the short and immediate term the heaviest point of the wheel and tire doesn't move, so there's no need for the counter-weight to move relative to them.
Some will see this for the simple counter-point that it is, and some will see it as some form of attack. It is the former.
#22
02-27-2014, 01:34 PM
OJ-
1) I appreciate your comments - works to encourage discussion...
Just because I obviously have no way of knowing - I'm going to assume you read all 4 installments of the review itself and not just the thread...
2) I, too, have ridden no hands on my bike prior to the balancers - but never could get longer distances without having to make minor corrections, either by hand or body weight shift. Was a significant difference for me.
3) The correct theory of the dynamic balancers (be it these devices or the loose beads in the tire) is that they counter any imbalance, all the time, shifting as necessary. For example - when I put the 2oz weight on my wheel for testing, imbalance was in no way noticed - the weight came off during the course of the ride and would not have been noticed except for the clanking noise as it rattled around in the fender, no imbalance was not noticed at that time either. Same principle as the tire wears or incurs minor damage. A wheel balanced with fixed weights is only balanced for the conditions on the balancing machine, at that moment. A method of dynamic balance continuously changes for even the slightest variation in condition encountered.
4) I simply have no other explanation for the perfectly even wear on 3 tires over the course of the test - maybe it's just my bike, but every tire prior to the devices showed some level of uneven wear when replaced.
JMHO based on my personal, hands-on experience. Your experience may be different.
1) I appreciate your comments - works to encourage discussion...
Just because I obviously have no way of knowing - I'm going to assume you read all 4 installments of the review itself and not just the thread...
2) I, too, have ridden no hands on my bike prior to the balancers - but never could get longer distances without having to make minor corrections, either by hand or body weight shift. Was a significant difference for me.
3) The correct theory of the dynamic balancers (be it these devices or the loose beads in the tire) is that they counter any imbalance, all the time, shifting as necessary. For example - when I put the 2oz weight on my wheel for testing, imbalance was in no way noticed - the weight came off during the course of the ride and would not have been noticed except for the clanking noise as it rattled around in the fender, no imbalance was not noticed at that time either. Same principle as the tire wears or incurs minor damage. A wheel balanced with fixed weights is only balanced for the conditions on the balancing machine, at that moment. A method of dynamic balance continuously changes for even the slightest variation in condition encountered.
4) I simply have no other explanation for the perfectly even wear on 3 tires over the course of the test - maybe it's just my bike, but every tire prior to the devices showed some level of uneven wear when replaced.
JMHO based on my personal, hands-on experience. Your experience may be different.
#23
04-19-2016, 01:25 PM
I will start by saying I haven't used these. I was trying to see what others thought. I did work on helicopter rotor systems for many years and have a fairly good understanding of the harmful effects of vibration and the general concept of vibration dampening. Having read this thread, I think many people are asking the wrong questions. The questions we should be asking is if the manufacturer has found the right fluid viscosity and the optimum size, density, shape, and volume for their weights. Instead we seem to be focusing on whether dynamic balancing as a concept is sound. Anyone who doesn't believe in dynamic balancing needs to consider a small block Chevy. It doesn't matter how well you've balanced your rotating assembly I'm going to bet your running a harmonic balancer on the front of the crank. I don't think there are very many reading this thread that would be willing to remove the harmonic balancer then rev the engine to even 4 or 5 grand... And yeah. I see that it is an old thread, I doubt the opinions of the folks who posted have changed much.
#24
04-19-2016, 01:56 PM
Well, my opinion has certainly not changed...
About 23,000 miles into a new set of tires on my '11. The front shows a hair under 2/32 wear (out of 6/32) - so call it a little less that half of usable tread - so projecting 45-50,000 out of the front tire.
Rear tire shows 8/32 wear (out of 11/31) - so 2/32 of usable tread left. Projecting about 27,000 out of the rear.
Not a street racer, but not a mope either - my throttle gets twisted a fair amount.
Very happy with the tire life, the smooth ride and the handling.
Will either move the balancers to my next bike or buy another set.
FWIW - still believe they are worth the expense.
About 23,000 miles into a new set of tires on my '11. The front shows a hair under 2/32 wear (out of 6/32) - so call it a little less that half of usable tread - so projecting 45-50,000 out of the front tire.
Rear tire shows 8/32 wear (out of 11/31) - so 2/32 of usable tread left. Projecting about 27,000 out of the rear.
Not a street racer, but not a mope either - my throttle gets twisted a fair amount.
Very happy with the tire life, the smooth ride and the handling.
Will either move the balancers to my next bike or buy another set.
FWIW - still believe they are worth the expense.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
skypilot_one
Touring Models
15
10-01-2014 12:13 PM
