The GT came to me with a vibration that was fairly bad, and now has gotten MUCH worse. Feels like a foward U-joint or front tire out of balance. You cannot feel it in you butt like a rear U-joint or rear tire. It drives like like a tread is separating on a front tire. All these are problems I have had in the past with other vehicles, so it didn't concern me at all. Well, yesterday I went over a bumpy intersection, the kind that rattles your teeth, and the vibration became noticably worse right then and there. It became bad... That made me think tire separation for sure. Well, I just got it home from driving around and contemplating. While it was parked and idling smooth, just for the heck of it, I goosed the gas. Well the dam thing went right to shaking right then and there, just as if it was going down the road! The entire car shook violently, but now the wheels and driveshaft weren't turning! So it is apparently an engine vibration, or possibly flexplate/converter, however unlikey. So, I guess it comes down to crank balancer unless anyone has any better ideas... I have owned a great many Fords, but never personally had a balancer go bad. Have you? Does this description fit? Thanks for your input.
I have had several of the balancers comming apart just look at the rubber and outer ring and sometimes it will contact the timming pointer.
I lost the outer ring with the rubber on my 289. The fan belt didn't jump off either. Thay got me wondering if the outer ring broke in two or three
So you guys agree that you wouldn't notice it while idling? It purrs like a kitten, only shaking violently when the rpms rise... That is why it took me so long to realize it was the engine, and I still wouldn't know if I hadn't revved it while parked.
'94-'95 are well known to have bad balancers from the factory. They usually let loose at 80-120k miles. My dad has owned three '95 GT's, and he had to replace the balancer on two of them at around 115k. The third one he bought with 125k and the balancer had already been replaced.
I talked to some guys on SN, and now I don't even want to start the engine. Seems to be a common malady like Jamie said. Here is an SN member failure, 94 GT: (I knew roller blocks were thin/weak, but jeez!)
OH My!!!! !! Do you know if that was a pure stock engine? Looks like it might have had a double roller timing chain, by the looks of the crank gear??
That would explain alot... Add to that thinness the fact that it has twice as much balance weight flying around the outside ring, compared to early SBFs, and that probably doesn't help. On the double chain... I don't know the answer, but I was under the impression that a double chain was standard on the HO engines.
