Return-Path: Received: from smtpauth09.mail.atl.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.69] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 821591 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 07:58:00 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.69; envelope-from=jerryhey@earthlink.net Received: from [65.176.136.131] (helo=earthlink.net) by smtpauth09.mail.atl.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DFAqn-0003HQ-TG for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 07:57:14 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Date:Subject:Content-Type:Mime-Version:From:To:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:X-Mailer; b=JbUEWFQfZETcDDtXujwKr88HNnwxQQrvRfK0GdC/j+Xo4wS0bgqkHSPQ8aLWqSb0; Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 07:58:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: RX8 P-Port Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-4-390728950 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) From: Jerry Hey To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) X-ELNK-Trace: 8104856d7830ec6b1aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79b8583449b8b84e7c56bf249fb92e744f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 65.176.136.131 --Apple-Mail-4-390728950 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On Friday, March 25, 2005, at 10:11 PM, Russell Duffy wrote: > I hate to always be the skeptic, but I don't quite understand wanting=20= > to PP a Renesis.=A0 The engine is already capable of peak power at=20 > higher RPM's than any of us want to run.=A0 To me, that means it = already=20 > has good intake timing, and plenty of intake port flow.=A0 What's to = be=20 > gained with this PP exercise?=A0 Are you trying to boost HP at lower=20= > rpms that we would run at?=A0 That sure doesn't sound like a typical = PP=20 > justification. That is exactly what will happen. The p port will deliver more HP at=20 the same RPM. While P ports can run very high rpm, they are quite=20 efficient throughout the rpm range. Jerry --Apple-Mail-4-390728950 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Friday, March 25, 2005, at 10:11 PM, Russell Duffy wrote: = ArialFFFF,0000,0000I hate to always be the skeptic, but I don't quite understand wanting to PP a Renesis.=A0 The engine is already capable of peak power at higher RPM's than any of us want to run.=A0 To me, that means it already has good intake timing, and plenty of intake port flow.=A0 What's to be gained with this PP exercise?=A0 Are you trying to boost HP at lower rpms that we would run at?=A0 That sure doesn't sound like a typical PP justification. That is exactly what will happen. The p port will deliver more HP at the same RPM. While P ports can run very high rpm, they are quite efficient throughout the rpm range. Jerry =20 --Apple-Mail-4-390728950--