Larry Cobb
Member
Mikey is the guy who can tell the difference between 50' of 2.5" and 2" vac hose,
but not when the 2" Dump valve is wide open.
:roll:
Larry Cobb
but not when the 2" Dump valve is wide open.
:roll:
Larry Cobb
If You were Designing your New Truckmount...
- Thread starter Larry Cobb
- Start date
Steve Smith
Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2006
- Messages
- 176
Larry,
I have never meet Mike P, but I have read many of his posts over the years.
Mike P is NUTS!
I have never meet Mike P, but I have read many of his posts over the years.
Mike P is NUTS!
T
The Magician
Guest
Lisa is right on. Underpowered TM with too big of blowers. I wonder why Larry didn't mention his 32 hp with 56 blower.??
Horsepower, Proper size blowers = Magic
Horsepower, Proper size blowers = Magic
Larry Cobb
Member
Magician;
The only TM we produce with a #56 (5MP) blower,
has the new 38 HP Kohler 1 Liter engine.
Larry
The only TM we produce with a #56 (5MP) blower,
has the new 38 HP Kohler 1 Liter engine.
Larry
Kevin B
Member
Are you kidding, the 47 is barely dual capable. Maybe dual furniture wands 
Mikey P
Administrator
Larry is the guy who sells truckmounts without a hand operable pressure regulator.
Duane Oxley
Moon Unit
This is a joke...
The whole, "gotta have a big motor and blower" thing came up when they became used as heat- generation sources.
From purely a vacuum standpoint, a 300 CFM 4M, 4005, 45 is all you can truly use for a single- wand system.
It's when their performance is "modified" for heat generation, that, "bigger becomes better". Why? Because most exchange systems choke down the blower in order to strain it and make it produce more heat. Some (like Larry's...) are more open about it, which is visible in reduced plumbing size attached to the blower. Others do it "on the sly" by shaving parts of the blower internally, having smaller openings fabricated into internal plumbing (typically at fabricated elbows), etc. The result is that such systems' vacuum ability is noticeably compromised as a result.
In other words, the design approach used in many systems today, effectively makes the blower "behave" like a smaller one... a 47 like a 45, a 45 like a 36, a 56, like a 47, etc.
A well- designed system has the components functioning at optimum levels. That being the case a 45 or equivalent blower with a 25 HP or larger motor is all you really can make optimum use of (unless you're using 2.5" hose for a large portion of the distance to the wand). Larger than that, and either the system isn't functioning efficiently, or there may just be a certain kind of "compensation for perceived insufficient length and girth of male appendage" (as Shawn might say...
) going on...
So, you really need to look at vacuum performance by itself, in order to answer the question rationally... then look at heat as a separate issue.
The whole, "gotta have a big motor and blower" thing came up when they became used as heat- generation sources.
From purely a vacuum standpoint, a 300 CFM 4M, 4005, 45 is all you can truly use for a single- wand system.
It's when their performance is "modified" for heat generation, that, "bigger becomes better". Why? Because most exchange systems choke down the blower in order to strain it and make it produce more heat. Some (like Larry's...) are more open about it, which is visible in reduced plumbing size attached to the blower. Others do it "on the sly" by shaving parts of the blower internally, having smaller openings fabricated into internal plumbing (typically at fabricated elbows), etc. The result is that such systems' vacuum ability is noticeably compromised as a result.
In other words, the design approach used in many systems today, effectively makes the blower "behave" like a smaller one... a 47 like a 45, a 45 like a 36, a 56, like a 47, etc.
A well- designed system has the components functioning at optimum levels. That being the case a 45 or equivalent blower with a 25 HP or larger motor is all you really can make optimum use of (unless you're using 2.5" hose for a large portion of the distance to the wand). Larger than that, and either the system isn't functioning efficiently, or there may just be a certain kind of "compensation for perceived insufficient length and girth of male appendage" (as Shawn might say...
) going on...So, you really need to look at vacuum performance by itself, in order to answer the question rationally... then look at heat as a separate issue.
The Preacher
Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 3,401
so who here besides LArry, Doodaddy and Matt have built more than one or two TM's???
I'll stick with the masters who look for a way to improve on what they already know!!!
I'll stick with the masters who look for a way to improve on what they already know!!!
Take note of Duane's reference to 2.5" hose, it does change the rules.
And keep in mind glides change the rules as well as 2" wands.
I'm also a little gray on the single wand "sweet spot", I realize the "numbers" show one thing, but in reality if you have a single wand with 200' of 2" hooked up to a 45 blower, and then hook up to a 56 blower, there IS a difference....so explain that?
And keep in mind glides change the rules as well as 2" wands.
I'm also a little gray on the single wand "sweet spot", I realize the "numbers" show one thing, but in reality if you have a single wand with 200' of 2" hooked up to a 45 blower, and then hook up to a 56 blower, there IS a difference....so explain that?
Jay D
Member
Free-flo...... OH never mind.
Mister Sir
Mister Sir
Duane Oxley
Moon Unit
Greenie...
"THAT" can be studied better when you can do a true A/B test of the two. And in order to do that, you'll need two systems, set up identically in all respects, including exhaust plumbing, blower RPM, etc., except for the blowers in question... or, be able to change blowers on a single system, for true A/B comparisons...
Duane
"THAT" can be studied better when you can do a true A/B test of the two. And in order to do that, you'll need two systems, set up identically in all respects, including exhaust plumbing, blower RPM, etc., except for the blowers in question... or, be able to change blowers on a single system, for true A/B comparisons...
Duane
Mikey P
Administrator
Duane Oxley
Moon Unit
I don't know if a 45 is standard or a 47 on Butlers, so I'll speak in terms of principles...
I have problems with Butler's typical "live vacuum" reel. And, just like you need to look closely at exhaust restriction, the same is true of intake restriction, which in that case, extends through that live reel. And that seriously affects vacuum performance. So, keeping that in mind, the answer is, "No.".
Without the live vacuum reel in the equation, I suspect that the people at Butler have their "stuff" together to optimize the rest of the design. (I haven't looked closely at a Butler setup in a long time... since the 1990's, so it would be difficult to say, without looking at something newer from them...)
But coincidentally, "Chad" with a couple of Butlers called me today. And during the conversation, he said that his 47 blowers on his Butlers are over-driven... or have a selectable pulley ratio that allows that ratio to be selected. If that's a Butler option, standard, etc., then I applaud them. And if it's so, then I'd suspect even more strongly that they do, do a thorough job of making sure that their vacuum is as uncompromised as possible.
...Then again, they'd have to, with that live vacuum reel being so common on their systems... :wink:
I have problems with Butler's typical "live vacuum" reel. And, just like you need to look closely at exhaust restriction, the same is true of intake restriction, which in that case, extends through that live reel. And that seriously affects vacuum performance. So, keeping that in mind, the answer is, "No.".
Without the live vacuum reel in the equation, I suspect that the people at Butler have their "stuff" together to optimize the rest of the design. (I haven't looked closely at a Butler setup in a long time... since the 1990's, so it would be difficult to say, without looking at something newer from them...)
But coincidentally, "Chad" with a couple of Butlers called me today. And during the conversation, he said that his 47 blowers on his Butlers are over-driven... or have a selectable pulley ratio that allows that ratio to be selected. If that's a Butler option, standard, etc., then I applaud them. And if it's so, then I'd suspect even more strongly that they do, do a thorough job of making sure that their vacuum is as uncompromised as possible.
...Then again, they'd have to, with that live vacuum reel being so common on their systems... :wink:
I'd go with an all SS compact, small footprint frame, liquid cooled 31 DFI engine with twin coolant and dual exhaust H/X's, overdriven 47 blower with H/X. All stainless, ceramic coated exhaust and diverter, all from John. Small LP post heater. High perf plumbed round mini vortex waste tank with external auto pump out.
47 blower overdriven on a clutch drive? I'm not buyin that for a second... I'm tellin ya right now a 47@15hg spinning at 2700rpm is just about more than a serpentine belt can take, more than a 175ft.lb. clutch can take (reliably), generates more internal bearing heat on the driveshaft than is acceptable, would over stress that 6ft. long 7/8" inner steel shaft with side load pressure, and would require SO much pressure from 2 A section belts to hold that they wouldn't last a day. Not to mention the extra side load that kind of belt tension would put on those bearings in the blower and shaft.... And that's at 2700rpm not 3700.
Mikey P
Administrator
All this Single Wand talk bores the bejesus out of me.
There is nothing like having more then enough suck. Not having to worry about running the shortest hose path, No wicking, screaming fast dry times with out padding or blowers.... A V tank with 3 ports is a spot that there is no going back from. Until you've used it, it's all excuses. I dont care if you can build a truckmount blindfolded with one arm tied behind your cowboy hat. You're just supplying average machines to the average Broke Dicks.
I applaud the guys who dare to think big and want to give us Super Cleaners a worthy tool.
John Sales, Shawn York, HXer John Hurtubise, those thieves at AT and Power Clean should all be commended for having the balls to give us enough to REALLY clean with two wands or more.
Let's here your thoughts on how to make a VAT even better
Do you Single Wand experts have any real ideas?
There is nothing like having more then enough suck. Not having to worry about running the shortest hose path, No wicking, screaming fast dry times with out padding or blowers.... A V tank with 3 ports is a spot that there is no going back from. Until you've used it, it's all excuses. I dont care if you can build a truckmount blindfolded with one arm tied behind your cowboy hat. You're just supplying average machines to the average Broke Dicks.
I applaud the guys who dare to think big and want to give us Super Cleaners a worthy tool.
John Sales, Shawn York, HXer John Hurtubise, those thieves at AT and Power Clean should all be commended for having the balls to give us enough to REALLY clean with two wands or more.
Let's here your thoughts on how to make a VAT even better
Do you Single Wand experts have any real ideas?
Kevin B
Member
As someone who has run 21hp/45 combo for the past six years. I recently upgraded to a Maxx470 4007 blower. The heat is great(although I think my bypass is stuck open at the moment), the vacuum is not really capable of dual wanding as is. First of all. HM uses 2" vacuum lines coming down off the waste tank lid to a box that holds the chem jug. Right there, it sizes it down to 1 3/4" neck openings so that you can slip a 2" hose onto it. Once I get things squared away with this new rig, this will be the first to go. 2.5" plumbing will be ran and a new chem box will be built similar to the one that is there now.
I think that people who want smaller blowers, are really just fooling themselves. I've always wanted bigger, I upgraded and in a year or two...i'll probably want bigger again. It's the natural progression of performance to want just a little bit more suck...etc.
Is the new everest 650 in the true dual class? I don't know, never ran one. I can tell that a 4007 untweaked 470 is not. Carpets and upholstery...fine, two wands on small hose runs...fine....two wands long runs commercial....I don't think so.
With that said, I won't buy a machine that my distributor carries, so until HM or PC come up with a big unit, then I'm sticking with what I have.
I think that people who want smaller blowers, are really just fooling themselves. I've always wanted bigger, I upgraded and in a year or two...i'll probably want bigger again. It's the natural progression of performance to want just a little bit more suck...etc.
Is the new everest 650 in the true dual class? I don't know, never ran one. I can tell that a 4007 untweaked 470 is not. Carpets and upholstery...fine, two wands on small hose runs...fine....two wands long runs commercial....I don't think so.
With that said, I won't buy a machine that my distributor carries, so until HM or PC come up with a big unit, then I'm sticking with what I have.
i may be fooling myself or just a fool....i wanted bigger years ago, now i want smaller. Matt i have almost 6000 hours on my shaft driven 47 blower with the original clutch for almost 9 years and she runs the engine at 2100 rpm and the blower close to 3000 rpm and she has very little to no relief on her...hg's climb to 18 at times. pretty reliable if you ask me.
The Cleanmore is a nice unit.... Close to 3000rpm is pretty impressive! Your pulley ratio sounds about dead on to the rest of the units out there. At 1500-1600rpm on the van engine you'd be around 23-2500rpm on the blower. Maybe the ticket to keeping the clutch holding is to increase the speed on the motor. I was talking to Harley about this a few weeks back in discussing couplers. At slower speeds couplers were tearing up from the load without the rpm's behind it. Run the machine at high rpm and no more coupler problems. It's possible the same can be said for the clutch? I'll machine a new crank pulley and speed up the system that way while keeping the van engine rpm's a little lower than 2100 and see what happens...
The Cleaning Artist
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 475
40-50hp is not enough for a 59 blower.
87hp with 59 blower
87hp with 59 blower
The Cleaning Artist
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 475
not yet, I talked with John. Now considering the v8 chevy due to cost but unsure if the belts will hold the hg I want to run. 87 hp ford will cost 5k for complete engine and rad. SB chevy 2k.
Decisions decisions decisions
Decisions decisions decisions
Vincent Feehan
Member
The Cleaning Artist
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 475
John says 1.2 gph. I find that hard to believe. but the engine is only turning 1200 rpm. I know a sbc inside and out. GM crate engine $1300 new and 245hp.
Hers a pic of a 600hp chevy I built for my mud truck.
Hers a pic of a 600hp chevy I built for my mud truck.
Ahh dude that's bad ass... I have a 4-bolt main 327 just waiting patiently for me to bring it back to life. I have a set of reworked camel back's still wrapped in plastic from the machine shop ready to go too... I just need to find something fun to put it in. I'd like to find a nice Chevelle but kind of want to do a rat for it if I do get one. The sb would be fun though. You did a nice job! What does John run his 68 blower at for lift? It looked like he had 3 belts on it. Maybe a 4th would hold for ya?
Latest posts
-
A different thread about vacuums. One that we can't argue on- Latest: Nate The Great
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
