Re: "Ergos"

["Steve" <smcastle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In another anonymous post, Ergos (as in "therefores"?) writes:

>>While it's a beautiful machine, it does not really deliver a
much
better balancing.<<

Compared to what?  What tire balancer does anonymous Ergos
recommend for use in balancing wheels and tires for BMW usage?

>>high speed RFV, which is the one that's annoying to a driver. <<

Maybe anonymous Ergos would care to explain to all of us
non-engineer types what radial force variation is.  For any
technical explanation to have any merit whatsoever, it actually
needs to explain something.

>>the Hunter uses a small drum to measure RFV

Which balancers use a large drum to measure RFV? And what
difference does the drum size make in measuring this thing you
call RFV?  And why is drum size important?  Again, a little
explanation would go a long way here.

>>the contact patch
of a tire on these drums is very different from that on plane
ground,
and the resulting forces also differ...<<

Finally, something that is partially understandable - translation
= a tire rolling against a drum on a Hunter GSP9700 has different
forces applied against it than the same tire would if it were
rolling on the down the highway.  But an explanation of why this
matters when performing a dual plane balance is missing . . . .

>>Bottom line: this very fancy machine delivers a slightly better
static
balancing... that's all. <<

My Webster's dictionary defines "static" as "exerting force by
reason of weight alone without motion."  Since every good tire
balancer I've seen with the exception of bubble balancers involve
rotation of the tire and measurement of imbalance within two
planes during rototation, I would hardly think this can be called
a "static" measurement.

What we really need here is Kurt Gibble to come to our rescue and
explain what anonymous Ergos is trying to tell us.

Steve C.

------------------------------

End of bmw-digest V9 #58
************************