Heres my thoughts on the belt drive.

[fidorama]

I am sure at some point someone has tried something different, but it must not have worked out so well, cuz nobody is doing it

 

[Trashy]

Here's the link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNyq2spHkS0

Thanks for posting the link seeing how LHF know how to type, and that's about it !!!

 

[ABMax24]

I already know its inefficient. I need someone to prove me wrong.

If chains work so well then replace your clutch belt with one, see how that goes. You can calculate the efficiency later.

 

[Longhairfreak]

I know this might be deflecting your thread a bit...... But what is better........ A tight track or a loose track?

Ill take a loose one.

 

[007sevens]

I bet if we put a torque wrench on my jackshaft it will take less ft/lbs than a Polaris belt drive to turn over.

we dont care how you jack your shaft

 

[SUMMIT TREE]

They say a belt drive is 97% efficient. So 97% of 8000 hp is 240 hp to turn that belt.

I'm no math wizard but 97% of 8000 is slightly more than 240

 

[Longhairfreak]

I'm no math wizard but 97% of 8000 is slightly more than 240

Really? 97% is a wash. we are only concerned with the 3% inefficiency.

 

[Trashy]

Ill take a loose one.

What if a tight track can put out the same rwhp as a loose one, with less wear? Then which one would you take?

 

[ABMax24]

I'm no math wizard but 97% of 8000 is slightly more than 240

Actually its 3% of 700hp, which is what the loss on the blower drive would be, which is 21hp, good work LHF.

 

[fidorama]

I will agree you would likely have less drag with a loose track than overly tight, however you need it tight enough to keep it aligned and not jumping driver cogs

 

[Longhairfreak]

Actually its 3% of 700hp, which is what the loss on the blower drive would be, which is 21hp, good work LHF.

Well I know that your 2 hardest years were grade 1.

 

[ABMax24]

Well I know that your 2 hardest years were grade 1.

They don't even teach percentages in grade 1, but you wouldn't know, you never made it that far.

 

[CrankShop910]

They should take the tracks off if they want to be really accurate..

 

[Longhairfreak]

Actually its 3% of 700hp, which is what the loss on the blower drive would be, which is 21hp, good work LHF.

No it 3% of 8000.

 

[Clode]

I bet your 2 hardest years were grade 1.

you need some new comebacks.....now go play in traffic

 

[Longhairfreak]

They don't even teach percentages in grade 1, but you wouldn't know, you never made it that far.

I must have have I outsmart you guys every time. Cause you still dont get it.

 

[Trashy]

They say a belt drive is 97% efficient. So 97% of 8000 hp is 240 hp to turn that belt.

So a 8,000 HP engine loses 240 HP to turn a drive belt, that is still making 7,760 HP. This is not acceptable to you

Please post what the #'s would be, if this same 8,000 HP engine was running gears and a chain.

I would be VERY interested to know what the drag efficiency difference would be!!!!

 

[ABMax24]

No it 3% of 8000.

Actually because the belt drive you are referring to handles only the power to drive the blower it is 700hp, or 3% of 700hp, which is a loss of 21hp.

 

[Trashy]

I must have have I outsmart you guys every time. Cause you still dont get it.

Answer my question please.

 

[Longhairfreak]

So a 8,000 HP engine loses 240 HP to turn a drive belt, that is still making 7,760 HP. This is not acceptable to you

Please post what the #'s would be, if this same 8,000 HP engine was running gears and a chain.

I would be VERY interested to know what the drag efficiency difference would be!!!!

Thats not what I said. It takes 700 hp to run that blower but the claims of a belt drive are 97% efficient dont jive.