seen this?

[wheelrite]

old page i think, just for info.....
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet ... _motor.htm

[ovyyus]

It's old all right - our very own Mitch 'Techstuf' Robinson might like to handle this one?

There is yet time for the doubting and lost children of GOD to turn and follow GOD'S PERFECT LAWS which are already written on the hearts and minds of HIS children rather than man's imperfect "laws of science".

The same record is stuck and repeating the same groove 3 years later - Mitch's never ending "dark hour" musical carousel :P

[ken_behrendt]

Actually, although his design was a non-runner, I kind of like its simplicity of construction. IF it had worked, then it would have been a practical, low maintenance design with no internal pivots or bearings to lubricate, no ropes or cords to replace. Kind of interesting the way be had the weights sealed into their own little sector compartments and visible through the plexiglass windows.


ken

[terry5732]

It was claimed to have run. The claim was that it ran without even an initial push. It was claimed to have for a period of minutes before something got out of alignment.

[ovyyus]

The claim was a lie.

[digitaljez]

The claim was a lie.

Although the actual device looks like it has stalled I like the look of the original sketches http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =5448#5448. I can easily see why he made a build of it. That thread is the only one I could find relating to it. Do you have a link to where the claim was proved/admitted to being a lie ? Was there a proof provided that shows why it would not turn ? The build obviously has 5 extended weights at the bottom causing it to stall but the original drawings only had 7 spring/weights and look more feasible. I would guess the reason must be that at some point three extended arms are never going to overbalance the other four. If he had not claimed it turned the concept is worthy of some respect IMO.
From my experimentation I do not think even Bessler had a self starting wheel. As has been suggested by others I think the rope that was 'stopping' it from turning, was actually holding it in a 'primed' position to keep it from settling into its balanced state. Once the rope was released the wheel would try to balance but in doing so the 'secret mechanism' had been set in motion. So any claim of a self starter immediately triggers my 'doubt mechanism'.

[Michael]

... I do not think even Bessler had a self starting wheel. As has been suggested by others I think the rope that was 'stopping' it from turning, was actually holding it in a 'primed' position to keep it from settling into its balanced state. Once the rope was released the wheel would try to balance but in doing so the 'secret mechanism' had been set in motion. So any claim of a self starter immediately triggers my 'doubt mechanism'.

Consider what you are saying here because what you are suggesting is the exact same thing as a self starting wheel.

[ovyyus]

Digitaljez, Mitch admitted to me in private discussions that his wheel never turned as he claimed it did. Therefore his claim is a lie.

The design was followed up by a few builders, eg: http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Gra ... index.html

MT18 is similar (a better design IMO as it isn't overly effected by CF), it also doesn't work.

An example of other claims of success by Mitch: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HJ_Motor/ ... scount=100 These and other claims (Google search the term "techstuf") seem to be just a cover for his ongoing religious crusading.

On the matter of a Bessler's earlier two self-starting uni-directional wheels: You aren't the first to suggest that Bessler might have tied his uni-directional wheels in a "pre-primed" position. I discount this speculation partly because it would require total control of the demonstrations by Bessler, in case someone happened to stop the wheel in the 'wrong spot', which doesn't seem to be the case. It also should be remembered that one of the criticisms leveled at the uni-directional wheels was that they exhibited all the characteristics of being wound up with a hidden internal spring - IMO, that describes a wheel under a constant torque.

[Michael]

I am thinking I should clarify the pre primed position aspects. A pre primed position is not any different ( where it counts ) as a consistenty out of balance wheel, even if there were three or more primed positions all one would have to do is repeat enough of the mechanisms and you would achieve a consistent out of balance state at any position the wheel was in.

[ken_behrendt]

I also agree that Bessler's one directional wheels were not "primed" in some special position that was critical to them starting off. As Bill said, this would have been immediately obvious to the many mechanically inclined witnesses that were allowed to actually handle the wheels and test them. I'm sure that they would have started and stopped them from every position possible to see if they could somehow "feel" how the weights were distributed inside of them. No, his one-directional wheel had to be self-starting from any position.


ken

[racer270]

http://kundelmotor.com/ ????

[digitaljez]

Bill, it has been a long time since I read John's book and had the impression that one third party account refered to the self starting of the wheel. I had come to think it was not an issue in itself for Bessler but would have been a defence against anyone claiming that an initial push to start it was the sole driving force.
The quote "To stop the wheel and retie the cords required tremendous effort" could describe the effort required to 'prime' the wheel. In practice it would be impossible to distinguish wether the effort was required to overcome a constant torque or was the required effort to 'prime' it. The description is of a strenuous endevour not conducive to delicate tests to try and determine the distribution of the internal weights.
I also had the impression that the only reason Bessler created the bidirectional wheels was to counter vague suggestions that it was wound up. I did not realise the criticisms were detailed to the point that constant torque was mentioned.
Thank you for clearing this up for me. Since my last house move my copy of John's book not yet turned up (hopefully it is in storage, not lost) so I now rely on this forum and the WWW for all my Bessler needs.

My observations of weights rotating around an axel always resulting in balanced states must just show I am still no nearer to a solution.

...and do I still not understand ?

Michael, thank you for your view but I do not think what you say is necessarily the case. I have in my hand a wheel that balances in two positions. If it is in position 1 and I 'prime' it (i.e. rotate it against the required direction of rotation) and then let go it will rotate through position 1 and settle in position 2. If this process could be made to repeat all the way around the wheel the problem would be solved. But it is apparent from this that in theory, the wheel could have numerous balance states but the initial impetus and subsequent impetuses could overcome these states. However once stopped it would again balance until set in motion again.

[P.T.]

Racer - The Kundel site. VERY COOL thanks for turning me on to it!!

[murilo]

Kundel motor! Fresh ideas and beautifull!
He uses spacial means to 'switch' magnets.
Beautifull! regs. M.

[racer270]

how about this vido....?


http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?p=mag ... ck=Results