X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.64] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 932324 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 04 May 2005 12:06:39 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.64; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050504160553.RZAE1994.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Wed, 4 May 2005 12:05:53 -0400 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Static MAP readings? Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 11:06:07 -0500 Message-ID: <044101c550c3$2e65b770$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0442_01C55099.458FAF70" 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_0442_01C55099.458FAF70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, I agree it does, and I have worried about it also. But you don't = get velocity without restriction, or IOW, there is no such thing as "no restriction" before getting to the port. Perhaps the question is - Is anyone getting more than 85 hp/rotor at 6000 rpm, MEASURED, with = normally aspirated, untuned intake, stock side-port, with 9.0 compression, newly overhauled engine. If so; I'll start considering a lower restriction induction system. =20 I understand what you're saying, but this still leaves me right back = where I started. I still feel like the MAP should not drop off at the TB port unless the TB is sized too small. =20 =20 On the other hand, I might measure this 10 or so inches away, and find = that the pressure is the same as it is at the TB port. Since restriction = must happen at least where the intake enters the housing, no matter how big = you make the runners, it will still get restricted. I assume this is why = the higher powered engines have such large inlets on the housings though. =20 Off to work. =20 Rusty =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0442_01C55099.458FAF70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Yes, I = agree it does,=20 and I have worried about it also.  But you don’t get velocity = without=20 restriction, or IOW, there is no such thing as “no = restriction” before getting=20 to the port.  Perhaps the question is – Is anyone getting = more than 85=20 hp/rotor at 6000 rpm, MEASURED, with normally aspirated, untuned intake, = stock=20 side-port, with 9.0 compression, newly overhauled engine.  If so; = I’ll=20 start considering a lower restriction induction = system.

 

I = understand what=20 you're saying, but this still leaves me right back where I=20 started.  I still feel like the MAP should not drop off at the TB = port=20 unless the TB is sized too small. 

 

On the other=20 hand, I might measure this 10 or so inches away, and find that = the=20 pressure is the same as it is at the TB port.  Since restriction = must=20 happen at least where the intake enters the housing, no matter how = big you=20 make the runners, it will still get restricted.  I assume this = is why=20 the higher powered engines have such large inlets on the housings=20 though.

 

Off to=20 work.

 

Rusty

   

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0442_01C55099.458FAF70--