Chris Lewis wrote:
> According to Harry K <turnkey4...@hotmail.com>:
> > Okay, I can buy that but I still think the chain hoist is way
> > overboard.

> Well yeah, but if you recall, I think I was the first to mention
> a chain hoist, simply because because I _already_ had one (a
> christmas present from 10 years earlier!) when I set up my lift
> system, so I built what I built with what I had, and described _that_.

> A pulley system could just as easily be substituted for the _specific_
> purpose of lowering barrels, but from the safety/ease/lifting
> standpoint, it isn't as nice as a hoist.

> [And mine was for _both_ lifting and lowering things.]

> > I would get a lot more fun out of rigging a few pulleys
> > than using one of those as heavy and slow as they are.  I can see
> > needing a hoist to raise the kegs -up- but a ramp would be plenty for
> > bringing them -down-.

> There's something to be said for engineering your solutions to be
> a bit more generalized than the original problem.  They often
> get used for more things than you originally intended.

> I do that a lot.  Overbuild/overcomplicate things.  But over the
> years, it's usually turned out to have been a very good idea.

> Yeah, I could have lifted the lawn tractor motor with a 2:1 pulley
> setup.  But (a) I already had the chain hoist and (b) now I can do
> a lot of other things that a simple pulley arrangement can't do or
> can't do very well.

> I could have used an engine hoist instead - a little more flexible.
> But I don't have one, I had a chain hoist.
> --
> Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
> It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.