On 2008-06-16, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 09:33:56 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm,
Ignoramus25555 quickly quoth:

On 2008-06-15, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 01:35:43 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner Asch quickly quoth:

2 belts is nice..but often not necessary on a compressor. if it
squeeks..belt dressing is cheap.

Ooh, bite your tongue, boy. Belt dressing is a salve, not a cure for
the original problem. His compressor has FOUR belts for a reason.
It's a BAM. (Ayup, that stands for BigAss Muthuh.)


Yep. Four belts, the compressor is indeed unexpectedly BAM. I will see
if I can buy the smaller pulley at McMaster (they offer pulleys with a
special hub tightener). If I order on Monday, I will get it next day
and I can be done on Tuesday and will be able to put it up on
ebay. However, the compressor would not be running up to its
potential of whole 7.5 HP.

Although a smaller pulley will -somewhat- reduce the load on the
motor, it will -primarily- just reduce the pump speed. I firmly
belive that a different motor is in order, Ig.


I will call Champion (now a division of Gardner Denver) to find out
the min and max horsepower and RPM of this pump. I hope that there is
still someone who can remember 1965 when this pump was made.

I think that it is a 10 HP pump. I have never seen smaller 4 cylinder
pumps. But maybe I am wrong. Wayne said that he saw it on a 7.5 HP
compressor, but maybe the pump was not used at max speed.

i

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/