X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-da02.mx.aol.com ([205.188.105.144] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2a) with ESMTP id 4822845 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:20:02 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.105.144; envelope-from=shipchief@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.203]) by imr-da02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p0MGJIYp005435 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:19:18 -0500 Received: from core-ddc004b.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-ddc004.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.52.141]) by mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 75768E000085 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:19:18 -0500 (EST) References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Supercharged Rotary X-AOL-IP: 198.238.213.154 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: shipchief@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CD886740BA4698_1A74_18EB6_web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 33124-STANDARD Received: from 198.238.213.154 by web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com (205.188.103.97) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:19:17 -0500 Message-Id: <8CD8867404A624C-1A74-B55B@web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [198.238.213.154] Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:19:18 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:418152128:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33cb4d3b03862209 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8CD886740BA4698_1A74_18EB6_web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I don't really see a benefit to a supercharger. Althought the turbo is poss= ibly heavier, the muffler can be lighter due to the exhaust energy being pa= rtially used up by the turbo. the Supercharged engine would have to carry a= heavier muffler system, offsetting any savings there.=20 -----Original Message----- From: Bryan Winberry To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 5:50 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Supercharged Rotary I believe Bobby Hughes in Austin is whom you=E2=80=99re thinking of. Bryan=20 =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of Dwayne Parkinson Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 6:59 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Supercharged Rotary =20 I didn't see a reply to this so I'll take a shot. YES. There's at least o= ne super charged rotary installation. I believe it's somewhere in Texas. =20 You may also be interested in this=20 =20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D06yxb5-HvxA =20 Happy building / flying =20 From: Dustin Lobner To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sun, January 9, 2011 4:21:08 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Supercharged Rotary Hi everyone, If going with an intake boosting system, everything I've heard so far is fo= r using turbos. Has anyone ever used a supercharger? I can't help but thi= nk that a supercharger would be a) more rugged b) easier/simpler to install= and c) lighter weight (for the whole install) compared to a turbo. I also= know that your efficiency is going to be down compared to a turbo. =20 What I was thinking was using something like this: http://www.procharger.c= om/pdf/C-1.pdf <--- beware it's a 3MB file. Thoughts? Dustin Rockford, IL =20 ----------MB_8CD886740BA4698_1A74_18EB6_web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" I don't really see a benefi= t to a supercharger. Althought the turbo is possibly heavier, the muffler c= an be lighter due to the exhaust energy being partially used up by the turb= o. the Supercharged engine would have to carry a heavier muffler system, of= fsetting any savings there.



= -----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Winberry <bryanwinberry@bellsouth.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2011 5:50 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Supercharged Rotary

I believe Bobby Hughe= s in Austin is whom you=E2=80=99re thinking of.
Bryan <= /div>
 <= /div>
From:= Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Dwayne Parkinson
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2= 011 6:59 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircra= ft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Su= percharged Rotary
 
I didn't see a reply to this so I'll take a sho= t.  YES.  There's at least one super charged rotary installation.=  I believe it's somewhere in Texas.
 
You may also be interested in this =
 
 
Happy building / flying
 
From:= Dustin Lobner <dmlobner@gm= ail.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircra= ft <flyrotary@lancaironli= ne.net>
Sent: Sun, January 9, 2011 = 4:21:08 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Superc= harged Rotary

Hi everyone,

If going with an intake boosting system, everything I've heard so far is fo= r using turbos.  Has anyone ever used a supercharger?  I can't he= lp but think that a supercharger would be a) more rugged b) easier/simpler = to install and c) lighter weight (for the whole install) compared to a turb= o.  I also know that your efficiency is going to be down compared to a= turbo. 

What I was thinking was using something like this:  http://www.procharger.com/p= df/C-1.pdf  <--- beware it's a 3MB file.

Thoughts?

Dustin
Rockford, IL
 
 ----------MB_8CD886740BA4698_1A74_18EB6_web-mmc-d07.sysops.aol.com--