McFarlane Wheel Balancer?

I think the "mass" ( or center of gravity) of the small wheels will not give you much of an indication of being balanced. I can't think of the right words to describe what I mean. I've used similar devices to balance ultralight props without good success. JMHO.

I think the balancer on the right is way more accurate to find the heavy side. ;)
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
I think the "mass" ( or center of gravity) of the small wheels will not give you much of an indication of being balanced. I can't think of the right words to describe what I mean. I've used similar devices to balance ultralight props without good success. JMHO.

I think the balancer on the right is way more accurate to find the heavy side. ;)
Click to expand...


I'm thinking about a the harbor freight axle type like the one on the right also.
 
Geico266 said:
I think the "mass" ( or center of gravity) of the small wheels will not give you much of an indication of being balanced. I can't think of the right words to describe what I mean. I've used similar devices to balance ultralight props without good success. JMHO.

I think the balancer on the right is way more accurate to find the heavy side. ;)
Click to expand...

Not really, we used this type of balancer on the props of the P3.
The sensitivity of the unit will depend upon how it is adjusted. when the string attach point is farther to the top it becomes less sensitive, the farther that attach point is to the bottom the more sensitive it becomes.
 
Tom-D said:
Not really, we used this type of balancer on the props of the P3.
The sensitivity of the unit will depend upon how it is adjusted. when the string attach point is farther to the top it becomes less sensitive, the farther that attach point is to the bottom the more sensitive it becomes.
Click to expand...


I see it's adjustable
 
bnt83 said:
I see it's adjustable
Click to expand...

The theory is good ,, how well it actually works, who knows? Like all tools, their ability to do the job is in the hands of user.
 
Tom-D said:
The theory is good ,, how well it actually works, who knows? Like all tools, their ability to do the job is in the hands of user.
Click to expand...


For nearly $200 it ought to be SUPER DUPER ______________.
 
That thing, like the other "aircraft" balancers, is to get a static balance. Nosewheels don't do well with static balance any more than the front wheels on your car, and will shimmy if there's a dynamic imbalance. To get that fixed, the wheel has to spin. I used to use an old auto dynamic balancer, modified to take the aircraft wheels, and my nosewheels didn't shimmy.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
That thing, like the other "aircraft" balancers, is to get a static balance. Nosewheels don't do well with static balance any more than the front wheels on your car, and will shimmy if there's a dynamic imbalance. To get that fixed, the wheel has to spin. I used to use an old auto dynamic balancer, modified to take the aircraft wheels, and my nosewheels didn't shimmy.

Dan
Click to expand...

I do not balance wheel assemblies unless they show a need when they do I balance them on the axel.
 
My A&P uses a motorcycle wheel dynamic balancer with great success.
 
SoloEqs said:
Way overpriced, and static balancing isn't as good as spin. Remember, those itty-bitty tires are doing a LOT of RPMs.

Go to Harbor Freight and spend $40 on a motorcycle wheel balancer, and you'll never be sorry.
Click to expand...

That's a static balancer. It won't identify dynamic imbalance. Machines that do that have sensors on each end of the axle, and old non-electronic ones had the axle mounted on a diagonal pivot with a dial indicator and a means of marking the axle as it spun. Way more than $40 for any such balancer.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
That's a static balancer. It won't identify dynamic imbalance. Machines that do that have sensors on each end of the axle, and old non-electronic ones had the axle mounted on a diagonal pivot with a dial indicator and a means of marking the axle as it spun. Way more than $40 for any such balancer.

Dan
Click to expand...


Just an observation. They balance all these jets (Hawker, Lear, Citation, Embraer, Challenger) nose wheels assemblies here with a static axle balancer. The same thing with the initial balance on props.
 
bnt83 said:
Just an observation. They balance all these jets (Hawker, Lear, Citation, Embraer, Challenger) nose wheels assemblies here with a static axle balancer. The same thing with the initial balance on props.
Click to expand...

Those jets have pretty stout steering assemblies and aren't prone to flutter. Typical Cessna nosegears are much lighter and get slop in the torque links and steering collar that let shimmy start, since the damper is above all the loose stuff. In the years of fixing those things I found, as recommended by the Cessna Pilot's Club, that a dynamic balance did more to stop shimmy than any other work or expense, including rebuilding the damper and linkage.

The 182RG has a really good nosegear that gives no trouble.

When I was young I worked in a gas station. Changed a few tires, and balanced them with a bubble balancer, the typical method in 1970. Most cars had some steering wheel shake at highway speeds because of it. When dynamic balancers became widely available, that went away.

For those unsure of the difference, see this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_balance

Dan
 
I've always been able to eliminate the Cessna nose wheel shimy without a dynamic balance but I get dynamic is a step up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top