SOOT IN THE FLUES


| November/December 1983



Soot in the flues

Hi! to all our dear family out there! Boy, is it hot!! And I guess I'm not supposed to say it but this is the last issue of the year, the Nov-Dec. one, the cold and snowy time of year right now, it sounds deliciously cool. Well. We are never satisfied, are we? Comes winter, we'll be wishing for spring and summer, but it is fun though to have four seasons of course that's what we're used to back here in Pennsylvania - I don't know if I'd like living where the weather is always the same. Well, anyhow it is that time to think of house cleaning (that's changed a good bit these latter years too) fall activities, Christmas surprises, festive dinners, helping others, not thinking of No. 1 so often and those New Year resolutions good luck -how did the last year's ones hold up? Anyhow, good times ahead for you in 1984, may you have many blessings in store!

MEL GRENVIK, Kenmare, North Dakota 58746 sends a letter regarding the inquiry by George W. Mairs of Pinckney, Michigan in the July-August issue concerning license agreements between American and Canadian firms for building American designs in Canada. 'I know of only two in addition to the Baker-MacDonald deal he mentions, ' relates Mel.

The Robert Bell Engine and Thresher Company of Seaforth, Ontario completed a license agreement in about 1900 to build the Port Huron steam traction engine in Canada. This was a design by the Port Huron Engine and Thresher Co. of Port Huron, Michigan. I believe the Bell Company is still in business and offers to manufacture a complete new boiler for steam traction engines.

Also, the John Abell factory in Toronto was purchased by the combination of Advance Thresher Co. and Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co. in 1902 and reorganized as the American Abell Engine and Thresher Company. This factory was absorbed by M. Rumely Company in 1912.

Possibly older readers know of other such agreements across the border. I hope this information is of some help.' (Any other folks have any data on this issue, please let us hear from you.)

'I'm writing in regard to a letter on page 13 of the July-August I.M.A. from R. W. Creek. I enjoyed his letter but I feel the R.P.M. figures for the drive pulley and mandrel pulley are turned around. I believe it should read a 14 inch drive pulley turning 900 RPM. Driving a 28' mandrel pulley will produce a saw speed of approximately 450 RPM. Using the sizes of pulleys listed and the RPM figures given, this is the only combination that would produce a reasonable saw speed, as I don't believe you would want to turn the saw at 900.