Return-Path: Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.123] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b2) with ESMTP id 3186880 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:33:01 -0400 Received: from user-33qt5ah.dialup.mindspring.com ([199.174.149.81] helo=Carol) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BH5Tv-0006L2-00 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:33:00 -0700 Message-ID: <005701c42961$60f6f3a0$0000a398@Carol> From: "sqpilot@earthlink" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: stock manifold Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:32:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0054_01C42937.775FBE80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2739.300 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C42937.775FBE80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Perry Mick=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 12:16 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: stock manifold Michael D. Callahan wrote: Never weighed the NA exhaust manifold, but the turbo manifold weighs 10 =20 lbs. Stock NA manifold is HEAVY! Probably over 50lbs. I will try to weigh = one tomorrow and report back..... if I still have it in the shop. Should not even be considered for an aviation conversion. It's built to withstand the heat of the air injection reactor = system. Basically, they inject air into the manifold via the vane-type air pump. = It afterburns the exhaust gasses in the exhaust manifold to clean up = emissions. Mike C. =20 You are wrong on that one Mike C.=20 I've flown the stock exhaust manifold for 5 years now. It does "feel" = heavy, but 50 lbs. it is not! As Paul Conner just wrote, it weighs 12 lbs. I never bothered to weigh = it so I did not have a number to share. It's bulletproof and not bound to break apart and go through my prop, = that's why I like it. Perry Hi, Perry....I have tried two other "stock manifolds", and the other = two were a little larger than this one, and thereby a little heavier, = but I doubt that even the larger one would be over 15 pounds. I'm = happy to hear that my choice of exhaust manifolds should stand the test = of time. Thanks for your valued input. Paul Conner ------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C42937.775FBE80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Perry=20 Mick
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 = 12:16=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: stock=20 manifold

Michael D. Callahan wrote:
Never weighed the NA =
exhaust manifold, but the turbo manifold weighs 10
    
lbs.

    Stock NA manifold is HEAVY! Probably over 50lbs. I will try to weigh =
one
tomorrow and report back..... if I still have it in the shop. Should not
even be considered for an aviation conversion.
    It's built to withstand the heat of the air injection reactor =
system.
Basically, they inject air into the manifold via the vane-type air pump. =
It
afterburns the exhaust gasses in the exhaust manifold to clean up =
emissions.
Mike C.
You are wrong on that one Mike C.

I've flown the stock = exhaust=20 manifold for 5 years now. It does "feel" heavy, but 50 lbs. it is = not!
As=20 Paul Conner just wrote, it weighs 12 lbs. I never bothered to weigh it = so I=20 did not have a number to share.

It's bulletproof and not bound = to break=20 apart and go through my prop, that's why I like = it.

Perry
Hi, Perry....I have tried two other = "stock=20 manifolds", and the other two were a little larger than this one, and = thereby=20 a little heavier, but I doubt that even the larger one would be over = 15=20 pounds.   I'm happy to hear that my choice of exhaust = manifolds=20 should stand the test of time.  Thanks for your valued = input.  Paul=20 Conner
------=_NextPart_000_0054_01C42937.775FBE80--