GMCforum
For enthusiast of the Classic GMC Motorhome built from 1973 to 1978. A web-based mirror of the GMCnet mailing list.

Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality
[GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality [message #280620] Wed, 24 June 2015 09:27 Go to next message
glwgmc is currently offline  glwgmc   United States
Messages: 1014
Registered: June 2004
Karma: 10
Senior Member
Hi Billy,

Thanks for the great belt info. Since our belts are 12.5" wide at the top, how does this relate to the suggestion to buy a belt where a 10mm socket will not fit over but a 11mm will? Wouldn't that make such belts too narrow?

Jerry

Jerry Work
The Dovetail Joint
Fine furniture designed & hand crafted
in the 1907 former Masonic Temple building
in historic Kerby, OR
http://jerrywork.com
.......
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 06:44:44 -0500
From: Billy Massey
To: "gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org"
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

http://www.bdub.net/Belts.pdf
See page 2

bdub
.........
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist



Jerry & Sharon Work
78 Royale
Kerby, OR
Re: [GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality [message #280623 is a reply to message #280620] Wed, 24 June 2015 10:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jhbridges is currently offline  jhbridges   United States
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
Senior Member
I bought a set of belts off the above listed place. They showed up at three different times, from three different locations, in three different packages, so be ready for this. All three fit properly as noted in Bdub's drawing. I have reasonable tension on the alternator, 1/2" to 1" of give in the longest run. I ran the battery nearly flat trying to crank the coach on a non-functioning fuel pump. When I corrected the problem and spun it off, it charged between 40 and 60 Amps for nearly five minutes before tapering. No slips, no squeals, no flopping under load. I got a second set for spares, but I don't think I'll need them anytime soon.

--johnny


Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons. Braselton, Ga. I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
Re: [GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality [message #280630 is a reply to message #280620] Wed, 24 June 2015 11:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
bdub is currently offline  bdub   United States
Messages: 1578
Registered: February 2004
Location: Central Texas
Karma: 5
Senior Member

Your talkin apples and oranges, Jerry. One is an industrial belt.

bdub
www.bdub.net/GMCLinks.html

On Jun 24, 2015 9:28 AM, "Gerald Work" wrote:
>
> Hi Billy,
>
> Thanks for the great belt info. Since our belts are 12.5" wide at the
top, how does this relate to the suggestion to buy a belt where a 10mm
socket will not fit over but a 11mm will? Wouldn't that make such belts
too narrow?
>
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist



bdub
'76 Palm Beach/Central Texas
www.bdub.net
www.gmcmhphotos.com
www.gmcmotorhomemarketplace.com
www.gmcmhregistry.com
www.facebook.com/groups/classicgmcmotorhomes
www.facebook.com/groups/gmcmm
Re: [GMCnet] belts-size vs. quality [message #280681 is a reply to message #280620] Wed, 24 June 2015 21:50 Go to previous message
Ken Burton is currently offline  Ken Burton   United States
Messages: 10030
Registered: January 2004
Location: Hebron, Indiana
Karma: 10
Senior Member
A bad belt is only 9.5 mm wide so take an open end wrench with you and measure. If it fits across the belt then the belt is the wrong width.

Ken Burton - N9KB
76 Palm Beach
Hebron, Indiana
Previous Topic: [GMCnet] Base plate wanted for Toyota Rav4 1998-2000
Next Topic: [GMCnet] Engine tech session at Rapids City
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Nov 17 12:10:38 CST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00894 seconds