That's not a bad price for a "new" engine.  I have
heard Bruce knows his stuff.  I think I'll fly the
Marcotte on an "old" 13B for a bit to gain trust in
the PSRU.  If you run over me during SnF 05 then I'll
have to do something.  Clark made my prop (3 bladed)
for the rotary and did a very good job.    
--- Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com> wrote:
> Mine is being built from parts by Bruce Turrentine.
> BTW, there are a lot of factors involved in building
> a Renesis for aircraft use that are not obvious.
> For instance, you can't take the manual transmission
> version and stick an automatic counterweight on it
> without a re-balance of the rotating assembly.
>
> I'll be running an RD-1C 2.85 gear drive to take
> advantage of the higher rpm powerband.  Just ordered
> the prop and it was a challenge working out how to
> get the same (or close) cruise rpm that I use now
> and still have the extra power available for
> 'afterburner'.   Clark Lydic at Performance Props
> was very helpful. I'll let you know how successful
> we were  (or weren't)  
>
> I haven't got the bill yet but Bruce says he will
> build them in the aircraft configuration for about
> $5800.
>
> Tracy
> (not on the payroll of Bruce or Clark : )
>
> PS:  My favorite part of the 2003 Sun 100 race was
> my radio call to #28, the longeze that started in
> front of me.  "Race 28,  race 29 passing high on the
> outside".    That was just as much fun as winning!!!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: ronald GOWAN
> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 5:35 PM
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Renesis Engine For Aircraft
>
> 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/
>
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:  
> http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>


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