---------------------------------------------------------- Engines-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 03/12/04: 2 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:48 PM - Suzuki 1300 SVS (Arthur Nation) 2. 08:53 PM - Double Belt Drive (Tedd McHenry) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:48:05 PM PST US From: Arthur Nation Subject: Engines-List: Suzuki 1300 SVS --> Engines-List message posted by: Arthur Nation Hi, I am looking for info on the above engine. Raven shows HP etc but no torque curves/vs HP etc. Would appreciate any info on your installation. Arthur Tacoma, WA ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:53:11 PM PST US From: Tedd McHenry Subject: Engines-List: Double Belt Drive --> Engines-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry I've recently had an idea that's probably crazy, but I'm interested in other people's thoughts on it. For a rotary installation, the offset that a belt drive provides isn't required, and is actually a liability in some installations. My idea is to use a two-stage belt drive. The first drive is connected to the output flange of the crankshaft in the conventional manner. But the driven pulley is on an idler shaft with another pulley that drives the second stage. The driven pulley of the second stage is concentric with the engine output shaft and connected to the prop flange. Each stage provides half of the total reduction ratio, so the two drive pulleys are the same size and the two driven pulleys are the same size. Advantages: The redrive output shaft is concentric with the engine crankshaft. Tighter packaging (vertically and laterally). Each stage contributes half of the overall reduction ratio, so the two large pulleys are smaller than the driven pulley would be in a single-stage redrive. Also, the smaller difference in diameter between the driving pulleys and the driven pulleys means that the shaft spacing can be closer (i.e. smaller "center distance factor"). Overall the reduction in the frontal area should be significant. Disadvantages: Cost, weight, more parts to fail, and longer. --- Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC