Tracy,  can you give us the "poop" on how you got your
hands on a Renesis engine and perhaps the cost?  I may
need one of these engines to run over you at SnF 05!
See you at Lakeland with either a Vari Eze (0-200) or
my new Long EZ (0-320).   Ron
--- Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com> wrote:
> Sounds like the NIH (not invented here) factor  to
> me.   I'm betting (with money) they are wrong about
> the Renesis.  I have one on the way scheduled for
> delivery next month.  With any luck it will be
> installed on the nose of my RV-4 before the next Sun
> 100 race at Sun 'n Fun.    
>
> The question I have for Powersport is:  Why did they
> stiff their customers who paid 100% for their FWF
> engine packages and did not get their engine
> controllers or exhaust systems.  I personally talked
> to 3 of them who had this happen and they said there
> were others who had the same experience.    Did they
> make delivery or not?  If not, I consider them out
> of business despite their claims to the contrary.
>
> Tracy Crook,  (and you can quote me on this)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Greg Fuess
> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 6:32 AM
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Renesis Engine For Aircraft
>
> All, Some food for thought.  Powersport has started
> replying to e-mail on another list, and was asked
> about the Renesis engine.  This is what Tim had to
> say.  I had thought that the Renesis would have been
> a great aircraft engine, but would have to lean
> towards more educated opinion.  The questions to
> powersport and their replies are copied in full
> below.
>  
> I would appreciate any feedback on what is said.
>  
> Thanks,  Greg Fuess
>  
> Thanks for the info. Some questions for you:
>
> 1. What is the status of Powersport? Is it currently
> shipping FWF
> packages for RVs? Which model RVs?
>
> Currently we have completely developed FWF packages
> for RV 6-7-8-9 (9 at your own  
> "not recommended by Vans" discretion.)
>
> 2. Is the Renesis engine interchangeable with the
> old 13B? Obviously
> different exhaust, but are the engine mounts, etc.
> the same?
>
> Simply put, the Renesis is not suited for
> installation in aircraft. There are many  
> reasons for this.
>
> 3. Is the Renesis engine better than the old 13B for
> aviation use? I
> understand it has better economy and sealing due to
> the new port
> arrangement. Is there anything else we should
> consider?
>
> No, the Renesis is far worse for aviation use. It
> does not have better economy,  
> especially at the RPM range used in an aircraft. It
> is lower HP! It still needs a suitable  
> aircraft ECU added. It develops its HP at a higher
> RPM with will reduce its life cycle.  
> The changes made were for emissions and low end
> torque, which are not important  
> factors in aircraft. Mazda still uses P-Port system
> for their top racing application.
>
> 4. Is Powersport planning on switching to a
> Renesis-based FWF?
>
> No, see above.
>
> I am not saying the Renesis is not a good engine, it
> is a great engine... for a car.
> The HP ratings are way overstated. Those who have
> run them on dynos have reported  
> outputs around 180HP.
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/