Return-Path: Received: from [65.54.168.113] (HELO hotmail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c1) with ESMTP id 724082 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 15:04:21 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.168.113; envelope-from=lors01@msn.com Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 12:03:01 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 4.174.7.95 by BAY3-DAV9.phx.gbl with DAV; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 20:02:51 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [4.174.7.95] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: : 13b vs 360 performance Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 15:02:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0173_01C50F81.9687FEE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.10.0009.2900 Seal-Send-Time: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 15:02:50 -0500 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2005 20:03:01.0057 (UTC) FILETIME=[85EBBB10:01C50FAB] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0173_01C50F81.9687FEE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RPM alone doesn't prove anything, but yes, I got 6400 RPM with the 2.176 = : 1 drive ratio and 7300 RPM with the 2.85 : 1. I beat several O - 360 = RVs with both setups. Tracy Ed / Jerry,=20 I stand corrected. Let me say that 'the 13b power I see being = achieved so far in NA 13b airplane installations seem to be less than = what O-360 guys are getting'. After mounting props was anybody able = to attain even 6000 rpm in their 13b NA aircraft installation, = level-flight? Tom=20 Jerry Hey wrote: I assume you are talking about a 6000 rpm limited rotary vs a wide = open=20 0-360. Run the rotary faster and thats the end of the story. Jerry Ed Anderson wrote: > Tom,=20 > I don't really think anyone can accurately make a generalization = like=20 > that. =20 > From: Tom > It's my understanding that NA non-renesis rotary installations=20 > produce less power than 360s, Perry Mick might have a word on this. > Eric Ruttan wrote: > A 360 Lyc does not produce the same power as a rotary. > If true, then the Ellison card may not get enough air. > If not true, then there is no real reason why the Ellison cannot = feed a > rotary. > > Ed, I understand your math, but even if the local inlet velocity is = much > higher, we dont care. the velocities adverage out to the same, as = the > volume of air =3D velocity * carb area. > > If the velocities are higher, the rotary consumes more air, and = makes=20 > more power. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second = Term' ------=_NextPart_000_0173_01C50F81.9687FEE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

RPM alone doesn't prove anything, but yes, I got 6400 RPM with = the=20 2.176 : 1 drive ratio and 7300 RPM with the 2.85 : 1. I beat = several=20 O - 360 RVs with both setups.

Tracy

Ed / Jerry,

I stand corrected. Let me say that 'the 13b power I see = being=20 achieved so far in NA 13b airplane installations seem to be less than = what=20 O-360 guys are getting'. After mounting props = was=20 anybody able to attain even 6000 rpm in their 13b NA aircraft = installation,=20 level-flight?

Tom

Jerry Hey = <jerryhey@earthlink.net>=20 wrote:

I assume you are talking about a 6000 rpm limited rotary vs a = wide open=20
0-360. Run the rotary faster and thats the end of the story.=20 Jerry

Ed Anderson wrote:
> Tom,
> I = don't=20 really think anyone can accurately make a generalization = like=20
> that.

> From: Tom
> It's my understanding that NA non-renesis = rotary=20 installations
> produce less power than 360s, Perry Mick = might=20 have a word on this.

> Eric Ruttan wrote:
> A = 360 Lyc=20 does not produce the same power as a rotary.
> If true, then the = Ellison=20 card may not get enough air.
> If not true, then there is no = real reason=20 why the Ellison cannot feed a
> rotary.
>
> Ed, I = understand=20 your math, but even if the local inlet velocity is much
> = higher, we=20 dont care. the velocities adverage out to the same, as the
> = volume of=20 air =3D velocity * carb area.
>
> If the velocities are = higher, the=20 rotary consumes more air, and makes
>=20 more power.
>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib=20 Jab's 'Second Term'

------=_NextPart_000_0173_01C50F81.9687FEE0--