Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 07:58:07 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1831356@logan.com>
From: peon@pacific.net.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Mathematical Challenged was Re: EWP adapter pics
Reply-to: leon@promotorsport.com.au
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <list-1831144@logan.com>


> Posted for Jim Sower <canarder@starband.net>:

SNIP>>
> 
> Just that somebody's overstating their case.  Like by a @($^$% ORDER
> OF MAGNITUDE.  Let's get real, girls.
> 
> Just tryin' to do the math  .... :o))  Jim S.

Good on you Jim,  my thoughts exactly.  The air has been thick 
with BS for over a year on this.  HIM at that "Other Place" started it 
all,  then roundly abused me for having the temerity to suggest HE 
was wrong,  threatened to ban me from the list,  and libeled 
Richard Davies,  the MD of Davies Craig.  From there,  it has taken 
on a life of its own!!

As I see it,  the main advantages of the EWP are weight and lower 
cowl height,  unless of course,  you are running "Plugs Up",  and to 
a lesser extend,  ease of plumbing,  and better temp control (so 
long as you have an efficient heat exchanger!!).

As for power absorption,  it has NEVER figured in my REASONS 
for fitting one,  but seems to be a preoccupation of many people.  I 
know the drag racers fit them because they eckon they get a 
power advantage,  but then again,  what would drag racers know ... 
(}:>) 

Come to think of it,  maybe that is a way of dempnstrating the 
power advantage, ... if therre is one ...  Run the auto Series III at 
the street drags we have here in Sydney on Wednesday nights.  

Only registered cars are allowed.  The ET's are not so significant,  
but the terminal velocity is,  and it's done to 2 decimal places.  A 
consistent  measurable increase in trap speed would confirm a 
power gain.

When I do the back-to-back tests on the same car,  on the same 
dyno,  on the same day,  I will be able to give you an 
approximation,  based on what the chassis dyno says. 

Conservatively,  I reckon about 1 - 2 BHP @ 6,000 RPM on a 
rotary,  but that's just off the top of my head.  This may or may not 
be enough to show up on a chassis dyno.  

I do howver,  expect to get a SIGNIFICANT difference,  (enough to 
see the difference on the chassis dyno) with our sweet little 10A 
PP race car which spins with considerable alacrity to 10,400 at full 
noise.  (There ain't NUTHIN' like a PP rotary at full song!!)  Noise,  
glorious noise!!

Anyway,  I'll just have to wait and see what happens once I get 
back in harness ....

Cheers mate!

Leon
.

> 
> 
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/