Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg

--
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/

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver versus
a normal size guy.

I'd like to see a 1/2" hex impact socket for the Big one !
Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Endowed; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Lee Michaels wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver versus
a normal size guy.





----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On 2008-06-13, Lee Michaels wrote:

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver versus
a normal size guy.

The big one, is usually operated by 2 burly men.

--
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/

"Lee Michaels" wrote in message
. ..

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver
versus a normal size guy.




Actually the big impacts are easy to handle if you can pick them up. I have
used 1" impact drives on 18 wheeler truck wheels and they are no harder to
use than a 1/2". Because they are impact drives they will not transfer the
torque to your hands and or arms like a direct drive drill.

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in message
...

Anip



I have had 1/2" tools twist my shoulder and wrist and arms in a VERY
painful fashion, even a 1/2" Skil drill. After 1/2", the tools just plain
have more torque and power than the operator can control in SOME
circumstances no matter what Bubba says. ("Hold my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. The whole idea of the impact driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a continuious
feed of power. In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

I can chime in on this one having been in the oilfield.

Ah, the patch.....

I remember many times when roughnecks would ask to borrow "those
little wrenches" (anything smaller than 2").

-Zz

"Lee Michaels" wrote in message
. ..

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver
versus a normal size guy.

I can chime in on this one having been in the oilfield.

There were applications where a 3/4" hydraulic impact was used for small (?)
bolts of the 1" to 1 1/2" variety. Then there were the larger ones. Such
as the ones that secured Blow Out Preventers, Christmas Trees, and Hydrils.
Three to Five Inchers. Done with 16" sledges and hammer wrenches or dogged
off hydraulics. These were often a combination of hydraulic impacts coupled
with a hard line "tong" dead man that provided an anchor that no human could
have provided because of the torque to weight ratio.

Even a "big fella" has his limits, and that is found when the "big fella" is
found somewhere away from the site having been thrown there from torque.
I've watched more than one "big fella" get tossed on his ass and laughed at
the bulletproof attitude. Sensible operators would assess this situation
ahead of time, and never approach the critical point.

I have had 1/2" tools twist my shoulder and wrist and arms in a VERY painful
fashion, even a 1/2" Skil drill. After 1/2", the tools just plain have more
torque and power than the operator can control in SOME circumstances no
matter what Bubba says. ("Hold my beer and watch this!")

When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the tool,
regardless of the weight of Bubba.

It's all mental masturbation. Something's gonna give. Someone's gonna get
hurt. Maybe not now, but down the road when carpal tunnel syndrome or soft
tissue damage issues make it impossible for that joint to function.

To think that human flesh has any superiority to steel is pure idiotic
folly.

Steve

On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in message
...

Anip



I have had 1/2" tools twist my shoulder and wrist and arms in a VERY
painful fashion, even a 1/2" Skil drill. After 1/2", the tools just plain
have more torque and power than the operator can control in SOME
circumstances no matter what Bubba says. ("Hold my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. The whole idea of the impact driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a continuious
feed of power. In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.

--
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/

Yep. This impact really jumps on you when starting up. Even with
woefully inadequate air supply (100' of 3/8 ID hose) it tried to jump.

i

On 2008-06-13, SteveB toquerville@zionvistas wrote:

"Lee Michaels" wrote in message
. ..

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
Somewhat amusing.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/packing/I...mpact-0001.jpg


What I would like to see is the second picture.

The one that shows the big fella who operates that big impact driver
versus a normal size guy.

I can chime in on this one having been in the oilfield.

There were applications where a 3/4" hydraulic impact was used for small (?)
bolts of the 1" to 1 1/2" variety. Then there were the larger ones. Such
as the ones that secured Blow Out Preventers, Christmas Trees, and Hydrils.
Three to Five Inchers. Done with 16" sledges and hammer wrenches or dogged
off hydraulics. These were often a combination of hydraulic impacts coupled
with a hard line "tong" dead man that provided an anchor that no human could
have provided because of the torque to weight ratio.

Even a "big fella" has his limits, and that is found when the "big fella" is
found somewhere away from the site having been thrown there from torque.
I've watched more than one "big fella" get tossed on his ass and laughed at
the bulletproof attitude. Sensible operators would assess this situation
ahead of time, and never approach the critical point.

I have had 1/2" tools twist my shoulder and wrist and arms in a VERY painful
fashion, even a 1/2" Skil drill. After 1/2", the tools just plain have more
torque and power than the operator can control in SOME circumstances no
matter what Bubba says. ("Hold my beer and watch this!")

When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the tool,
regardless of the weight of Bubba.

It's all mental masturbation. Something's gonna give. Someone's gonna get
hurt. Maybe not now, but down the road when carpal tunnel syndrome or soft
tissue damage issues make it impossible for that joint to function.

To think that human flesh has any superiority to steel is pure idiotic
folly.

Steve



--
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/

When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the tool,
regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.
--


Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:
my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. The whole idea of the impact
driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.



Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? The whole idea to the
pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications with
out great effort. The only thing that I see different would be that the
larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position. Its
greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but beyond that
pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on the operator.

On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:
my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. The whole idea of the impact
driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.



Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? The whole idea to the
pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications with
out great effort. The only thing that I see different would be that the
larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position. Its
greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but beyond that
pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on the operator.


I have very little experience. I handled two large impacts (both for
selling on ebay as I have no need for them).

One was a 1.5" splined I-R impact (sold to a rec.crafts.metalworking
member). Another was that 2.5" impact.

I did not have enough air to spin up that 2.5 impact to full speed.
But I did have enough air to spin up the 1.5" impact. I held it as
tightly as I could, and still it almost jumped out of my hands.
--
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/

Ignoramus29659 wrote:
....

I did not have enough air to spin up that 2.5 impact to full speed.
But I did have enough air to spin up the 1.5" impact. I held it as
tightly as I could, and still it almost jumped out of my hands.

Spinning it free isn't the same as having it on a piece of work, but
they still have torque...

--

"Leon" wrote in message
...

"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message
...
On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:
my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. The whole idea of the impact
driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with
little
effort other than simply holding the tool. Beccause of the weight of
the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.



Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? The whole idea to
the pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications
with out great effort. The only thing that I see different would be that
the larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position.
Its greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but beyond
that pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on the
operator.

I have experience with the larger wrenches, and posted such experience, and
you pooh poohed me. Let's hear about your experience, and please omit the
phrase "should not".

Steve

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:udu4k.3446$WH.174@trndny05...
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the tool,
regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.
--


Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be a
weak argument.

Steve

"Ignoramus29659" wrote in message
...
On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

I have very little experience. I handled two large impacts (both for
selling on ebay as I have no need for them).

One was a 1.5" splined I-R impact (sold to a rec.crafts.metalworking
member). Another was that 2.5" impact.

I did not have enough air to spin up that 2.5 impact to full speed.
But I did have enough air to spin up the 1.5" impact. I held it as
tightly as I could, and still it almost jumped out of my hands.

An impact that "does not work properly will be tough to hold on to". I
have a 3/8" air ratchet that is holder to hold on to than the 1" that I used
to use. Needless to say the 3/8" ratchet does not work properly. ;~(

On Jun 13, 9:48*am, "Leon" wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message

... On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

my beer and watch this!")



A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. *The whole idea of the impact
driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. *In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. *Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.

Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? *The whole idea to the
pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications with
out great effort. *The only thing that I see different would be that the
larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position. *Its
greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but beyond that
pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on the operator.

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in message
...

I have experience with the larger wrenches, and posted such experience,
and you pooh poohed me. Let's hear about your experience, and please omit
the phrase "should not".

Steve


I was not trying to prove you wrong, but the picture of the 2 impacts show
an pneumatic 1/2" impact and I would assume also that the larger one is
pneumatic also. You mentioned Hydraulic Impacts, those I have no experience
with at all. You also mentioned a comparison to your 1/2" Skil drill.
There is no comparison what so ever between a direct drive drill and an
impact driver. For years when in the automotive business I use 1/2" impacts
and they only require the effort to hold the tool. Perhaps 1~2 % of the
force feeds back to the operator as opposed to a 1/2" drill where 100% is
delivered back to the operator. On numerous occasions I used a 1" impact to
remove lug nut from "Large" equipment, obviously not as large as the 2.5"
tools is capable of handling but in my 35+ years of experience with properly
working impact drives the bigger the capacity 1/4", 3/8", 1/2", and 1" there
was no difference in feed back to the operator once in place one hand to
pull the trigger was all that is needed to prevent the tool from spinning.
Weight was the only difference in my experience. "A properly working impact
Should Not deliver much if any feed back to the operator. An inferior or an
"in need of servicing" unit may not provide the operator with proper buffer
from the toque. Impacts deliver thousands of on/off impulses that
accomplish loosening or tightening nuts and bolts. If the tool has an
internal air leak it can bypass the hammering/impact mode and simply try to
spin continuously, that is when the impact would require more effort from
the operator.

"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

I cannot state which law comes in to play but can tell you from experience
that I have never experienced a measurable amount of feed back difference
using a 1/2" impact to remove automotive lug nuts to a 1" impact removing 2"
nuts.

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in message
...

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:udu4k.3446$WH.174@trndny05...
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the tool,
regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.
--


Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the
tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... Define "Makes a living" grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is probably one
of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes to raw
strength and size. If there is a human who can conquer the larger tools
without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's him. Of course, he
probably doesn't have a minute of tool training in him so who knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

On Jun 13, 3:00*pm, Tim Shoppa wrote:
On Jun 13, 9:48*am, "Leon" wrote:





"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message

... On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

my beer and watch this!")

A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator than
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. *The whole idea of the impact
driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. *In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with little
effort other than simply holding the tool. *Beccause of the weight of the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the 1"
impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real monsters
when operated with adequate air supply.

Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? *The whole idea to the
pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications with
out great effort. *The only thing that I see different would be that the
larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position. *Its
greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but beyond that
pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on the operator.

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The principal of the impact action is the same regardless of the size.
I don't remember my mechanics very well, but I do recall that the
mathematics of "impulse" is different from simple statics. Many shots
from a BB gun can move a floating aircraft carrier but the shooter
never feels more than a minor recoil VERY many times. The energy
delivered is large but in tiny, rapid increments.

On Jun 13, 3:11*pm, "Leon" wrote:
"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message

...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

I cannot state which law comes in to play but can tell you from experience
that I have never experienced a measurable amount of feed back difference
using a 1/2" impact to remove automotive lug nuts to a 1" impact removing 2"
nuts.

Yeah. There's NO WAY that 100 ft lbs of torque are being delivered to
my wrist when I remove lug nuts from my truck.

On Jun 13, 3:36*pm, "Joe AutoDrill" wrote:
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the
tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate. *

Sorry. *If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... * Define "Makes a living" *grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is probably one
of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes to raw
strength and size. *If there is a human who can conquer the larger tools
without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's him. *Of course, he
probably doesn't have a minute of tool training in him so who knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills:http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills:http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

I'm no pipsqueak, but this guy looks like he could frighten a 5"
diameter bolt loose!!!

wrote:
On Jun 13, 3:11 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message

...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular
momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that
torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's
supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial
uses (lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does.
Not
true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

I cannot state which law comes in to play but can tell you from
experience that I have never experienced a measurable amount of
feed
back difference using a 1/2" impact to remove automotive lug nuts
to
a 1" impact removing 2" nuts.

Yeah. There's NO WAY that 100 ft lbs of torque are being delivered
to
my wrist when I remove lug nuts from my truck.

An impact wrench uses the motor to spin up a big chunk of metal that
functions as a hammer. The hammer is then allowed to strike an anvil
to which the socket is attached, conveying torque to the fastener.
It's the same idea as wanging on a slugging wrench
(http://www.drillspot.com/products/67...lugging_Wrench
for example) with a hammer only the tool does it all for you. If it's
a big heavy hammer then the tool is going to convey some torque back
to the operator as the hammer spins up, but since the tool can take
its time about spinning up the hammer it it conveys much less force to
the operator than the tool applies to the fastener.



--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

SteveB wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 3:36 pm, "Joe AutoDrill" wrote:
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on
the tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has
to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... Define "Makes a living" grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is
probably one
of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes
to raw strength and size. If there is a human who can conquer the
larger tools without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's
him. Of course, he probably doesn't have a minute of tool training
in him so who knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills:http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills:http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

I'm no pipsqueak, but this guy looks like he could frighten a 5"
diameter bolt loose!!!

Yet a real pipsqueak could get the big bolt off there using the
proper
technique and tool. Sometimes big guys are plain vanilla dangerous.

Did you happen to see the "Dirty Jobs" episode in which one of the
jobs was changing a tire on a heavy recovery vehicle? The motor pool
sergeant weighed about half what the tire did (and she was kinda cute
too) and had no trouble handling one. On the other hand, Mike Rowe,
trying to do it by brute force and awfulness instead of by using the
tools designed for the job, managed to drop one on a cameraman, who
fortunately managed to avoid injury.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Leon" wrote in message
...

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in message
...

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:udu4k.3446$WH.174@trndny05...
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the
tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.
--


Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Good for Joe. Citing some over sterioded wrestler/boxer/football player as
an example of using power tools is a weak argument at best. I know there
are all types of tools. I've worked with a lot of them. I know some are
sweet to use, and have very little negative effects on the operator. And
then I know some that will kick the living **** out of you.

BTW, I used to make a living using these things.

Steve

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:fTA4k.5851$1x.611@trndny06...
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the
tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be
a weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... Define "Makes a living" grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is probably
one of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes to
raw strength and size. If there is a human who can conquer the larger
tools without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's him. Of
course, he probably doesn't have a minute of tool training in him so who
knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.

I think anyone who REALLY knows and understands tools will say, beef don't
matter. And little guys can get just as much done or more by using their
heads, leverage, and by using the tool properly.

It is common for a power tool to eat the lunch of even the beefiest operator
when that operator doesn't use the tool properly, or tries to use muscle
over technique. Many amputees will verify this fact of life.

There is no glory in someone being so burly as to use power tools in an
unsafe and unintentioned way over the skinniest guy using it right and
getting the job done and going home with all his fingers. If I had to work
with either, give me the skinny safe operator rather than the beefcake
showoff.

Steve

wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 3:36 pm, "Joe AutoDrill" wrote:
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on the
tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has to be
a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... Define "Makes a living" grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is probably
one
of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes to raw
strength and size. If there is a human who can conquer the larger tools
without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's him. Of course, he
probably doesn't have a minute of tool training in him so who knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills:http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills:http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

I'm no pipsqueak, but this guy looks like he could frighten a 5"
diameter bolt loose!!!

Yet a real pipsqueak could get the big bolt off there using the proper
technique and tool. Sometimes big guys are plain vanilla dangerous.

Steve

On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

[ ... ]

I was not trying to prove you wrong, but the picture of the 2 impacts show
an pneumatic 1/2" impact and I would assume also that the larger one is
pneumatic also. You mentioned Hydraulic Impacts, those I have no experience
with at all. You also mentioned a comparison to your 1/2" Skil drill.
There is no comparison what so ever between a direct drive drill and an
impact driver. For years when in the automotive business I use 1/2" impacts
and they only require the effort to hold the tool. Perhaps 1~2 % of the
force feeds back to the operator as opposed to a 1/2" drill where 100% is
delivered back to the operator. On numerous occasions I used a 1" impact to
remove lug nut from "Large" equipment, obviously not as large as the 2.5"
tools is capable of handling but in my 35+ years of experience with properly
working impact drives the bigger the capacity 1/4", 3/8", 1/2", and 1" there
was no difference in feed back to the operator once in place one hand to
pull the trigger was all that is needed to prevent the tool from spinning.

And perhaps spinning it up *without* a load would quickly
accelerate the square drive and some internal parts to full speed without
using the impact, thus transferring more to the user's hands -- which
could explain Iggy's experience. He did not say that he had it on an
appropriate nut load -- but that it did try to twist out of his hands.
(The 1" or 1-1/2" one, not the 2-1/2" one IIRC.)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:40:14 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:

An impact that "does not work properly will be tough to hold on to". I
have a 3/8" air ratchet that is holder to hold on to than the 1" that I used
to use. Needless to say the 3/8" ratchet does not work properly. ;~(

Most air ratchets are not impact tools.

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 3:36 pm, "Joe AutoDrill" wrote:
When you hit the 1" and greater, I'll bet the house and car on
the tool, regardless of the weight of Bubba.

Google search Bob Sapp and re-evaluate.

Sorry. If you can't post a cite to back up your argument, it has
to be a
weak argument.

Steve

Steve, IIRC Joe makes a living working with this kind of stuff.

Hmm... Define "Makes a living" grin

It was more of a joke than a serious post although Bob Sapp is
probably one
of the scariest human beings on the face of the earth when it comes
to raw strength and size. If there is a human who can conquer the
larger tools without beinbg tossed around like a play thing, it's
him. Of course, he probably doesn't have a minute of tool training
in him so who knows...

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills:http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills:http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

I'm no pipsqueak, but this guy looks like he could frighten a 5"
diameter bolt loose!!!

Yet a real pipsqueak could get the big bolt off there using the
proper
technique and tool. Sometimes big guys are plain vanilla dangerous.

Did you happen to see the "Dirty Jobs" episode in which one of the
jobs was changing a tire on a heavy recovery vehicle? The motor pool
sergeant weighed about half what the tire did (and she was kinda cute
too) and had no trouble handling one. On the other hand, Mike Rowe,
trying to do it by brute force and awfulness instead of by using the
tools designed for the job, managed to drop one on a cameraman, who
fortunately managed to avoid injury.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

I was a Teamster for 37 years. One of the favorite sayings was, "Give a
lazy man a job, and they will find the quickest easiest way every time."

Steve

On 2008-06-14, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2008-06-13, Leon wrote:

[ ... ]

I was not trying to prove you wrong, but the picture of the 2 impacts show
an pneumatic 1/2" impact and I would assume also that the larger one is
pneumatic also. You mentioned Hydraulic Impacts, those I have no experience
with at all. You also mentioned a comparison to your 1/2" Skil drill.
There is no comparison what so ever between a direct drive drill and an
impact driver. For years when in the automotive business I use 1/2" impacts
and they only require the effort to hold the tool. Perhaps 1~2 % of the
force feeds back to the operator as opposed to a 1/2" drill where 100% is
delivered back to the operator. On numerous occasions I used a 1" impact to
remove lug nut from "Large" equipment, obviously not as large as the 2.5"
tools is capable of handling but in my 35+ years of experience with properly
working impact drives the bigger the capacity 1/4", 3/8", 1/2", and 1" there
was no difference in feed back to the operator once in place one hand to
pull the trigger was all that is needed to prevent the tool from spinning.

And perhaps spinning it up *without* a load would quickly
accelerate the square drive and some internal parts to full speed without
using the impact, thus transferring more to the user's hands -- which
could explain Iggy's experience. He did not say that he had it on an
appropriate nut load -- but that it did try to twist out of his hands.
(The 1" or 1-1/2" one, not the 2-1/2" one IIRC.)

No load, no nut.

Here's the old video of that impact spinning up.

http://yabe.algebra.com/~ichudov/mis...divx.video.avi

I held it as hard as I could.
--
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/

"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

wrong application - the energy transfer is to accelerate a rotary hammer
that then smacks against an anvil delivering an impluse - when the hammer
hits the anvil, neither is connected in any significant way to the handle -
so you have to hold the torque of accelerating the hammer, not the impact
torque (beause the acceleation is caused by the air motor, and the reaction
torque of the air motor is against the body of the tool)


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On 2008-06-14, Ignoramus29659 wrote:
On 2008-06-14, DoN. Nichols wrote:

[ ... ]

And perhaps spinning it up *without* a load would quickly
accelerate the square drive and some internal parts to full speed without
using the impact, thus transferring more to the user's hands -- which
could explain Iggy's experience. He did not say that he had it on an
appropriate nut load -- but that it did try to twist out of his hands.
(The 1" or 1-1/2" one, not the 2-1/2" one IIRC.)

No load, no nut.

Here's the old video of that impact spinning up.

http://yabe.algebra.com/~ichudov/mis...divx.video.avi

I held it as hard as I could.

I suspect that it would have been easier to control with a well
torqued in the socket. There would have been less spinning up.

Not going to bother visiting the web site. Video is a pain to
view on this system -- especially with my preferred browser.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Tim Shoppa wrote:
On Jun 13, 9:48=A0am, "Leon" wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message

... On 2008-06-13,
Leon=
wrote:

my beer and watch this!")



A 1/2" Skill drill will deliver much more feed back to the operator
tha=
n
a
1/2" impact that is operating corectly. =A0The whole idea of the
impact=

driver
is to deliver impact pulses that loosen or tighten rather than a
continuious
feed of power. =A0In the tire business I often used a 1" impact with
li=
ttle
effort other than simply holding the tool. =A0Beccause of the weight
of=
the
tool a 1/2" impact wrench gave the operator more feed back than the
1" impact wrench.

That, however, is not true for larger impacts. These are real
monsters when operated with adequate air supply.

Do you have personal experience with larger impacts? =A0The whole idea
to =
the
pneumatic impact is to enable a person to handle larger applications
with out great effort. =A0The only thing that I see different would be
that the=

larger 2.5" impact would simply be harder to pick up and position.
=A0Its greater size would probably require 2 people to handle it but
beyond that pulling the trigger should not exert much more effort on
the operator.

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

You are not thinking hard enough about the problem that is solved by impact
wrenches.

The only net torque that must get transfered to the operator is the torque
required to make the nut and socket and rotate in free space - aka when not
attached to anything. This is because as the nut comes off, the only thing
that actually moves, is the nut and the internal parts of the wrench, and
therefor the only torque that must be transfered to the operator is the
torque required to turn the nut a few rotations if it were floating in
weightless in space - which is basically something even a 50 lb kid could
support.

The very large amounts of torque applied to break the nut free is applied,
and then removed - so the net change is zero. In a perfect impact driver,
if the nut didn't move, the operator would feel no torque at all.

It works because it applies a large amount of torque in a short time -
which causes some part of the wrench to start moving, but then a smaller
torque is applied in the opposite direction for a longer period of time,
causing the moving parts to come to a stop - with no need to transfer any
net motion or torque to the operator if the nut didn't move. And when the
nut does move, the only torque transfered to the operator is the torque to
overcome the angular momentum of the nut.

Still, life is not perfect, and I'll bet that big ass wrench could knock a
very big guy on his butt at times.

--
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
http://NewsReader.Com/

"William Noble" wrote:
"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in message

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial uses
(lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does. Not true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

wrong application - the energy transfer is to accelerate a rotary hammer
that then smacks against an anvil delivering an impluse - when the hammer
hits the anvil, neither is connected in any significant way to the handle
- so you have to hold the torque of accelerating the hammer, not the
impact torque (beause the acceleation is caused by the air motor, and the
reaction torque of the air motor is against the body of the tool)

I've never looked at the design but it's got to be a bit more complex than
that.

The rotary hammer can't just be accelerated in a single direction. It's
got to be accelerated in both directions. So after it "hits" the anvil,
it's got to be brought back for the next strike. This requires that the
hammer transfer torque in both directions. As a result, the net torque
sent to the operator can in theory be zero. To make that actually work,
the wrench would need have at least two moving parts - like two hammers
which were taking turns making the strikes and using the momentum of each
other to move - with a net transfer of zero torque to the operator. I
don't know if real torque wrenches work that way, but you would think those
really large ones would almost have to work that way - or else just require
they have long handles with two operators to absorb the torque.

I think my logic on this is correct - but maybe I'm just crazy....

--
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
http://NewsReader.Com/

"Curt Welch" wrote in message
...
"William Noble" wrote:

Tim.

wrong application - the energy transfer is to accelerate a rotary hammer
that then smacks against an anvil delivering an impluse - when the hammer
hits the anvil, neither is connected in any significant way to the handle
- so you have to hold the torque of accelerating the hammer, not the
impact torque (beause the acceleation is caused by the air motor, and the
reaction torque of the air motor is against the body of the tool)

I've never looked at the design but it's got to be a bit more complex than
that.

The rotary hammer can't just be accelerated in a single direction. It's
got to be accelerated in both directions. So after it "hits" the anvil,
it's got to be brought back for the next strike. This requires that the
hammer transfer torque in both directions. As a result, the net torque
sent to the operator can in theory be zero. To make that actually work,
the wrench would need have at least two moving parts - like two hammers
which were taking turns making the strikes and using the momentum of each
other to move - with a net transfer of zero torque to the operator. I
don't know if real torque wrenches work that way, but you would think
those
really large ones would almost have to work that way - or else just
require
they have long handles with two operators to absorb the torque.

I think my logic on this is correct - but maybe I'm just crazy....

--
Curt Welch
http://CurtWelch.Com/

http://NewsReader.Com/

Curt - take an impact wrench apart and see how it works - it's pretty much
what I said - I've taken (smaller ones) apart and fixed them, they are quite
simple.



** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Curt Welch wrote:
"William Noble" wrote:
"Tim Shoppa" wrote in message
...
On Jun 13, 9:48 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Ignoramus9641" wrote in
message

I gotta disagree with you. Law of conservation of angular
momentum -
if you're tranferring that much net torque to the target, that
torque
has to pretty soon make it up to the wrench and whatever's
supporting
the wrench. The rotational inertia of the wrench and plumbing will
take up some small initial amount of impact, and for some trivial
uses (lugnuts) this may be the only important torqueing it does.
Not
true
for a 2.5" on an oilfield!

Tim.

wrong application - the energy transfer is to accelerate a rotary
hammer that then smacks against an anvil delivering an impluse -
when the hammer hits the anvil, neither is connected in any
significant way to the handle - so you have to hold the torque of
accelerating the hammer, not the impact torque (beause the
acceleation is caused by the air motor, and the reaction torque of
the air motor is against the body of the tool)

I've never looked at the design but it's got to be a bit more
complex
than that.

The rotary hammer can't just be accelerated in a single direction.
It's got to be accelerated in both directions. So after it "hits"
the anvil, it's got to be brought back for the next strike.

No, it hits again on the next rotation.

This
requires that the hammer transfer torque in both directions. As a
result, the net torque sent to the operator can in theory be zero.
To make that actually work, the wrench would need have at least two
moving parts - like two hammers which were taking turns making the
strikes and using the momentum of each other to move - with a net
transfer of zero torque to the operator. I don't know if real
torque
wrenches work that way, but you would think those really large ones
would almost have to work that way - or else just require they have
long handles with two operators to absorb the torque.

I think my logic on this is correct - but maybe I'm just crazy....

The wikipedia article has a video of the operation of the mechanism.

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_wrench"

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)