When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Interesting. I wonder whether it would actually be better or worse. All I know is that at high rpms I have never had any issues whatsoever with my a\c or alternator belts, yet I have read several other posts about similar power steering pump belt issues (In addition to a plethora of hydraulic issues with the system as well!). My hypothesis was that the third point of contact across from the point of tensioning would actually stabilize the system by eliminating excess up-down travel of the elastic belt, much like a serpentine is stabilized by all sorts of pulleys. Just a hypothesis but please explain your reasoning by gentler curve
Instead of the belt making a ~180 degree turn around the p/s pully, the contact area is lessened because the belt would make ~120 degree turn around the pully. It just seems to me that the less the contact area, the more chance for the belt to come off.
Also the belt would necesserily be longer, so "X" percent of stretch and flex would be a larger number leading to more bouncing on the pulleys.
On the other hand, if you have the pulleys and belts, it may be worth a try.
Last edited by toddalin; Jan 30, 2010 at 01:50 AM.
If I understand correctly.....picture the area on the pulley that contacts the belt.
In my 2 pulley example, approximately 50% of the crank pulley and 50% of the power steering pulley is in contact with the belt.
Whereas, in the 3 pulley setup, only 33% of each pulley is in touch with the belt.
The more contact, the more retention.
I think I will give it a shot and let you guys know what happens. Im gonna try to find that pulley you have on your engine snoopy and try the triple set up. Worst case i throw another belt into my fan