Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.72] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 815027 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:02:39 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.72; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050322040156.OCCF5558.imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:01:56 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Back pressure test results Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:02:03 -0600 Message-ID: <01e901c52e93$e7ccdc40$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01EA_01C52E61.9D326C40" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01EA_01C52E61.9D326C40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable These results have convinced me to stick with a turbo (not as much = detriment from back pressure as I thought), =20 Hi Dave, =20 I was always under the impression that the turbo exhaust manifold itself = is restrictive, and far from ideal from a scavenging standpoint. It might = be just as restrictive as the turbine housing, which may lead you to a = false conclusion. I still strongly suspect this is where Paul's power is = going. =20 The concern about manifold backpressure goes away to some extent when = you bolt the real turbo in place, since the turbo more than makes up for the restriction. Installing the T04B, and a better flowing exhaust = manifold will be like hitting the jackpot. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (still turbo free) ------=_NextPart_000_01EA_01C52E61.9D326C40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

These results have convinced me to stick with a turbo = (not as=20 much detriment from back pressure as I thought),

 
Hi=20 Dave,
 
I was = always under the=20 impression that the turbo exhaust manifold itself is restrictive, and = far from=20 ideal from a scavenging standpoint.  It might be just as = restrictive as the=20 turbine housing, which may lead you to a false = conclusion.    I=20 still strongly suspect this is where Paul's power is going. =20
 
The = concern about=20 manifold backpressure goes away to some extent when you bolt the real = turbo in=20 place, since the turbo more than makes up for the = restriction.  =20 Installing the T04B, and a better flowing exhaust manifold will be like = hitting=20 the jackpot. 
 
Cheers,
Rusty = (still turbo=20 free)



 ------=_NextPart_000_01EA_01C52E61.9D326C40--