Track belting

I would tend to agree with yu onyour view point,they are very secrative about the belting composition,they will tell enough to make it sound great and thats all. Some use a belt that has a molded rubber edge on it,I can do the same but its just going to cost alot more money,,and it ends up getting scraped off anyway. I can match any belt stength they can offer,I can get a 3ply 1000 piw also if it was needed for the big machines. So yes i feel there is a very large mark up.

anyone know the pitch of the bombi track/ I think it is 3.25 by 4.50 and 17 feet long.

Any progress on the belts? 1202 wide track...needs full set.

Hi I'm new to the forum and have a thiokol 2100 and I would definitely be interested in a cheaper source for belting. I would be willing to bunch my own pelt. I've found some pnuemtic punches that fit in a cheap are chisel which could be great

Well here goes. If you are looking for oem belting i would sugest bogie his prices are fare. Now if you want to go for conveyer belting there are many supplyers. EG oem belting for my bombi starts at 450 then 640 then 875 dollars that is tryed 3 supplyers. now the closest belting i can find is 2 ply 220 with the temp rateing and bend ratio can get it for 3.78 lin foot and .15 per hole punched it is 3/16 thick. should work for my project low hp and light weight.if any one has any input to belting please sound off your new snow cat owner. oh will post pics when i figure out how to post. Hammy.

Still wondering if a "deal" has been brokered for belting, bulk roll or cut and punched??

59muskeg said:

I would tend to agree with yu onyour view point,they are very secrative about the belting composition,they will tell enough to make it sound great and thats all. Some use a belt that has a molded rubber edge on it,I can do the same but its just going to cost alot more money,,and it ends up getting scraped off anyway. I can match any belt stength they can offer,I can get a 3ply 1000 piw also if it was needed for the big machines. So yes i feel there is a very large mark up.

Click to expand...

Any info on belting yet?

I've been hoping to hear back from Doug (59muskeg), as it seems he has done considerable research on belt characteristics and pricing. But it seems he's MIA.

I'm reluctant to buy new belting (from a local supplier) if I can get a better product at a reasonable price from (or through) 59muskeg.

At this point I have no intention of buying new belts from Tucker, Fall Line or Okners.

Try Capitol Rubber in Sacramento , Ca. I paid $973 out the door for all of my belts . I punched my own hole and it was easy .
Here is what I got .

4- 5 1/2"x22'
4- 6 x 22'
1- punch tool

3/8 thick 3 ply . Worked great !I think it is called 303 in the rubber business but its #76 at Capitol Rubber .

Anybody ever thought of using cleated conveyor belting? It might work for some applications, like a tracked trailer for instance. Found some here.

Any updates on belting suppliers ( Canada), looking for 5 ply-550 x 5 1/2 in ?
J5 Bombardier

I think 59muskeg is MIA and we are all on our own.

I've been busy working on a different Tucker and have resigned myself to the fact that the one needing new belts will not be running this winter.

Word must have got out to Fall Line, they may have made him disappear because he was poking around too much

I sent him a message today as well... need to start stocking up on some quality belting...

Muskeg, you out there?

J5 Bombardier said:

Any updates on belting suppliers ( Canada), looking for 5 ply-550 x 5 1/2 in ?
J5 Bombardier

Click to expand...

In many cases you can use grain elevator belting it is made for the cold and is resistant to stretch comes in many plys and is easy to get. with that said our belting comes from Europe and is all of the above and is prestretched and is made just for track belting but many have just used the elevator belting for years with good success. more plys is not always better unless you are putting it on a hydrostatic machine with enormous torque then plys are your Friend .

boggie said:

In many cases you can use grain elevator belting it is made for the cold and is resistant to stretch comes in many plys and is easy to get. with that said our belting comes from Europe and is all of the above and is prestretched and is made just for track belting but many have just used the elevator belting for years with good success. more plys is not always better unless you are putting it on a hydrostatic machine with enormous torque then plys are your Friend .

Click to expand...

Boggie,

I've done some research and discovered that my employer has an account with an large company that sells belting (among other things). I've purchased some bearings some seals from them and the prices have been really good (I guess my employer buys a lot of stuff). If they carry the right type of belting this may be my lowest cost option.

I'll give them a call, but can you give me any specifics on what to ask for in terms of top ply thickness, bottom ply thickness, number of plies, rubber composition, etc.


Thanks!

Blackfoot Tucker said:

Boggie,

I've done some research and discovered that my employer has an account with an large company that sells belting (among other things). I've purchased some bearings some seals from them and the prices have been really good (I guess my employer buys a lot of stuff). If they carry the right type of belting this may be my lowest cost option.

I'll give them a call, but can you give me any specifics on what to ask for in terms of top ply thickness, bottom ply thickness, number of plies, rubber composition, etc.


Thanks!

Click to expand...

Spec's are really Dependant on use and machine but for must of what most of you will be using them for light use on snowcats 3 ply 330 is fine 1/8 covers top and bottom some of the industrial equipment Muskegs,J5,Nodwells,any hydrostatic machine should be 4 ply 440 minimum on the heavy stuff we use 5 ply and 6 ply it has to be belting made for the cold that is why if you have someone to supply what they use for grain elevators it works about as good as you can get for the cost. OEM manufacturers should be using specific belting just for tracks it has low low stretch . excellent cold abilities and the European belting is the best and the most expensive like I mentioned most run of the mill belting guys will not have access to nor even no that there is a special track belt. but in Europe it is very common.

I finally heard back from the belt supplier. He offered 3-ply, 330 PIW for $4.65 a foot (4 1/2" wide).

But now the bad news. Covers are 1/16" both top and bottom, minimum radius is 16" (Tucker idler wheels are 13 1/2" in diameter) and the minimum temp is 0 f.

So back to square one....

I know the belting co. that I dealt with is quite a ways away from you guys in the west, but the belting Co. here in Michigan that worked with me on selecting the proper belt for my cat, were quite helpful and experienced in cold weather belting. My original belt on my 601 was a 4 ply, the new belt for my 601 is a 3 ply (but it is the same thickness) as the old 4 ply and they say it is MUCH better belt than what was made as a 4 ply back in 1963. My top covering is "I think" is 3/16, bottom covering 1/16.

I wish I would have taken pics of there factory, because they had ALL KINDS of belting, and rolls of belting that were as every bit as big as a Thiokol 601 that they move around with overhead cranes. I was quite impressed watching them making or (cutting) my belting to size and installing the Stainless Steel lacing. I can dig up the info on them it anybody is interested in contacting them, they are in Westland Michigan.

Ah...the beauty of a cat track sine wave

Weatherby,

Thanks for the reply, and the suggestions.

I noticed in the photos you used a different [and more robust] track lacing system than I've seen installed on Tuckers.

One belt supplier in SLC recommended a belt with a 3/16" top cover and a 1/16" bottom cover, which is what you got. IIRC, Boggie recommended "balanced" covers of 1/8". Do you recall why you selected covers with those specs? Also, was your belt supplier DP Brown?

Thanks

Blackfoot Tucker said:

Weatherby,

Thanks for the reply, and the suggestions.

I noticed in the photos you used a different [and more robust] track lacing system than I've seen installed on Tuckers.

One belt supplier in SLC recommended a belt with a 3/16" top cover and a 1/16" bottom cover, which is what you got. IIRC, Boggie recommended "balanced" covers of 1/8". Do you recall why you selected covers with those specs? Also, was your belt supplier DP Brown?

Thanks

Click to expand...

Yes, my belt supplier was DP Brown. I can't recall why the top and bottom coverings are offset however, they did say the three ply belting that I am using is much more of a superior belting in all respects, compared to the original four ply made back in the 60s

They had "I think" three or four difference lacing styles. My style was the heaviest offered for that size of belting, it came in plated steel or stainless. Also the laceing are connected together by way of a piece of "cable" not a steel (pin or rod) kind of interesting.

Weatherby,

While I'm picking your brain, I'm curious as to the backing plates you used.

I've owned three Tuckers; one 1979 and two 1980's. All three had different style grouser backing plates.

The 1979 has stamped steel plates with rounded edges (they measure 1 9/16" x 4 1/4"), The earlier 1980 model has much thicker (1/4") plates that measure 1" x 4", and the later 1980 machine had a round tubular plate with flattened ends for the bolts to go through.

I've been kicking around a couple of ideas. One is to use aluminum backing plates, the other is to use one backing plate to span across two track belts. The reason is the track belts show wear at the ends of the backing plates. By spanning two belts I remove half of the wear points.

Any opinions?

Blackfoot Tucker said:

Weatherby,

While I'm picking your brain, I'm curious as to the backing plates you used.

I've owned three Tuckers; one 1979 and two 1980's. All three had different style grouser backing plates.

The 1979 has stamped steel plates with rounded edges (they measure 1 9/16" x 4 1/4"), The earlier 1980 model has much thicker (1/4") plates that measure 1" x 4", and the later 1980 machine had a round tubular plate with flattened ends for the bolts to go through.

I've been kicking around a couple of ideas. One is to use aluminum backing plates, the other is to use one backing plate to span across two track belts. The reason is the track belts show wear at the ends of the backing plates. By spanning two belts I remove half of the wear points.

Any opinions?

Click to expand...

Until you asked this question, I had never noticed this on Tucker tracks, so I had to look at your pics of your cats to see what you are referring to, and you bring up a very good question. After thinking about this for a wile and looking close at your tracks, I see NO reason why you can't do what your thinking of doing, HOWEVER, I first asked myself "why" did Tucker NOT do this themselves and "why" dose Tucker (along with other cat makers) use malt-i strips of belting to make-up a track, as opposed to a Thiokol 601 which uses just two strips, and my theory on this, is ONE....A weight savings, and TWO....ease of repair to the belt, if you should damage some part of it (you could replace a 4" strip of belt verses a 8" strip of belt). I may be totally missing something in my theory on this, if so somebody please correct me!!!
The reason I feel Tucker uses "two" 4" backer plates verses "one" 8" backer plate (per grouser), IS, also a weight AND cost savings, because there is no reason to span the gap between the two strips of belt, they could save on the material (cost) that it would take to span that gap, plus they could save on the weight of material to span that gap. Other than that I see no other reason why Tucker did not use a 8" backer.
As far as doing what you are thinking about doing Jay, for the reasons you explain, IMO I think it makes a lot of sense, the only down side to that theory is "if" you used aluminum, it would add to the cost of a backer but be lighter than a steel backer, and if you used a backer made out of steel, it would be cheaper (cost wise) but add weight, but using a 8" backer would solve your problem. And then again, the added cost or weight (depending on which way you go) may not be that big of a issue, seeing that it will solve a existing problem.

the other thing i would be concerned about on the full span backing is sticks .\,rocks and ice chunks getting caught between the backers and grousers just a thaught

dds said:

the other thing i would be concerned about on the full span backing is sticks .,rocks and ice chunks getting caught between the backers and grousers just a thaught

Click to expand...

I agree, that could also be a issue

I hadn't thought about objects getting caught in that opening. The possibility (probability?) of that happening and causing damage negates any benefit, at least to me.

I appreciate your thoughts as you saved me a bunch of work!!!

Okay, I finally got off my butt and called DP Brown in Westland, MI.

I spoke with a fellow named Mike S and he was extremely helpful. Here are the belt specs: 330 PIW belting, stretch factor of 1.5-2.0% temp rating from -50F to 180F. The covers are 1/16" and 3/16". The belt will also work with the 13 1/2" diameter Tucker idler wheels.

I thought the cost was reasonable. My Tucker belts are 4 1/2" wide and just under 16' long. I told him I was looking for 18 belts (2 spares) and the price was just under $45.00 per belt.

He had an interesting thought. I've always assumed that the thicker cover would be to the outside (the side the grouser bars bolt to). He suggested the idea of putting the thicker side on the inside (where the backing plates are) because the grouser bars would likely hold the belting away from the surface.

Comments on Mike's idea?

Any one have any belting made up for a Thiokol 4T10?

I can get lots of different size Goodyear belting if I have the pitch and length for the track you are looking for we will punch it to Call me 1-888-797-8799