X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-m14.mx.aol.com ([64.12.138.204] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTP id 975825 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:26:40 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.138.204; envelope-from=BMears9413@aol.com Received: from BMears9413@aol.com by imo-m14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.3.) id q.2c2.356465b (15877) for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from FWM-R01 (fwm-r01.webmail.aol.com [152.163.211.129]) by air-id07.mx.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP id MAILINID74-3e0543eb50f1f7; Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:25:54 -0500 Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:25:52 -0500 Message-Id: <8C7FB9BDDA51A40-C74-8897@FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com> From: bmears9413@aol.com References: Received: from 65.182.71.113 by FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com (152.163.211.129) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:25:52 -0500 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 15106 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Six port bolt-on manfold progress (was: RX-8) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MailBlocks_8C7FB9BDD992E88_C74_855C_FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net X-AOL-IP: 152.163.211.129 X-Spam-Flag: NO ----------MailBlocks_8C7FB9BDD992E88_C74_855C_FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ed, keep in mind that you older 13B has some advantages over the renises. If for any reason you blow out an apex seal, which has happened now and then, you old 13b will just spit it out the exhaust port. The renesis....who knows where its going....just round and round until it seizes the entire engine? Bob Mears -----Original Message----- From: Ed Anderson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 23:26:20 -0500 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Six port bolt-on manfold progress (was: RX-8) Having the older 13B, which was redline in the auto at 7500 rpm, I would certainly not feel comfortable with a higher rpm under continuous operation. Now, with lightened rotors and dynamic balancing, I might reconsider {:>) Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: rijakits To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 6:34 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Six port bolt-on manfold progress (was: RX-8) I am rooting for his success - naturally I would only run 8000 rpm with his intake on my older 13B, but I would be happy with that {:>) Ed. Why not 9000 rpm? Thomas J. ("TJ") ----------MailBlocks_8C7FB9BDD992E88_C74_855C_FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Ed, keep in mind that you older 13B has some advantages over the renises. If for any reason you blow out an apex seal, which has happened now and then, you old 13b will just spit it out the exhaust port. The renesis....who knows where its going....just round and round until it seizes the entire engine? 
 
Bob Mears
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 23:26:20 -0500
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Six port bolt-on manfold progress (was: RX-8)

Having the older 13B, which was redline in the auto at 7500 rpm, I would certainly not feel comfortable with a higher rpm under continuous operation.  Now, with lightened rotors and dynamic balancing, I might reconsider {:>)
 
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: rijakits
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 6:34 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Six port bolt-on manfold progress (was: RX-8)

 
I am rooting for his success - naturally I would only run 8000 rpm with his intake on my older 13B, but I would be happy with that {:>)
 
Ed.
 
Why not 9000 rpm?
 
Thomas J. ("TJ")
----------MailBlocks_8C7FB9BDD992E88_C74_855C_FWM-R01.sysops.aol.com--