![]() |
Re: Andy Mark Super Shifter
inspired by the same design concept as 254/968, we did the same thing this year.
|
Re: Andy Mark Super Shifter
We went the other way (some will say the wrong way) and had each shaft supported at FOUR points, but adjustments were built in...
We machined our own extra-long output shafts (the AM long shafts were about 2 inches too short) to direct drive our half-track treads (centrally mounted on each side, omnis at the four corners, one AM SS per side). Two roller bearings, one built into either tread plate, supported the far end of the shaft and the keyed drive wheel. We then had an additional 1+" gap between the inner tread plate and the gearbox plate to allow for an optional sprocket set to drive the rear omni wheels (which we never added). Two beefy custom brackets with oblong mounting holes allowed us to adjust the exact position of the gearbox w.r.t the bearings in the tread plates. With the gearboxes locked down, we could remove the outer tread plates for belt changes without worry of misalignment. No problems with the gearboxes or bearings through 3 regionals and the Championship. |
Re: Andy Mark Super Shifter
This spreadsheet may be useful in looking at the difference in loading of the shafts. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/1998
It would seem, based upon the math that the AM long shaft can handle ~85 lbf at the end with a safety factor of 2 and the short shaft ~175 lbf with a safety factor of 2. We ran them cantilevered driving a chain. |
Re: Andy Mark Super Shifter
Quote:
We love the Supershifter! |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:14. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi