Return-Path: Received: from mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.114.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b3) with ESMTP id 3220322 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 07 May 2004 13:55:26 -0400 Received: from ppp-0-103.edin-a-1.access.uk.tiscali.com ([80.225.138.103]:3880 helo=nscvsy6kod72n8) by mk-smarthost-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com with smtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BM9Z4-000LAc-ET for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 07 May 2004 18:55:14 +0100 Message-ID: <006c01c4345c$75e2cd10$678ae150@nscvsy6kod72n8> From: "Tony Dolby" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Coolant Pressure Gauge Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 18:54:42 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Mark Steitle" > Well, that's interesting. This reminds me of a nagging question I have > had, but haven't asked. > > I was curious about the need to go to a smaller crank pulley to slow down > the water pump and alternators. > From memory, the crank pulley is about 5-1/2", the alternator pulleys are > about 2-1/2", and the water pump > pulley is about 4" diameter. > Hi Mark, Just my two pennerth, Surely in Ed's marginal slip situation most, or all, of the slip would take place on the smaller pulleys and the much greater load on the alternator would make this slip first i.e. before the WP. Also, just an idea, is there any merit in using slightly larger pulleys, not huge, same ratio but more bite and more forgiving of wear/slack? Just returned from hols, only 301 emails left to read, love it!! Cheers, Tony, Hebrides.