Yes, .46 - .47 is what I calculated for BSFC when leaned
aggressively. In my experience, there is no danger of
over-leaning a normally aspirated rotary at any power setting if the
ignition timing is correct. I ran the Sun 100 at WOT, 500 MSL when leaned
100 deg LOP.
The BSFC calculation was based upon HP derived from Van's AC power
required vs air speed chart for the RV-4 and fuel flow
measurements.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 2:31 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions from a
potential rotaryphile
Ed, Al and all,
My first post about the "Sport Aviation"
Rotary/Lycoming comparison questioned
the fuel burn part of the test........It is my understanding that the
"Powersport" fuel
system lacks a leaning system........Does anyone in the group know if
this is true ??
If this is true that would severely affect the Rotary
fuel burn numbers........On the
other hand if the "Powersport" system has a leaning capability do the
owners know
that the Rotary can be leaned very aggressively compared to the Lycoming
as proved
by Tracy Crook and verified by many others........Tracy has reported fuel
specifics
of as low as .47 lbs/hp/hr with aggressive leaning if I recall correctly
!!
Jump in here and help defend the Rotary reputation Tracy ,
Ed and any others now
flying with "Real World Experience" !!! IMHO
--
Kelly Troyer
Dyke
Delta/13B/RD1C/EC2
--------------
Original message from "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>:
--------------
Good Luck, TJ. I have found
that a lot of people just don't want to be educated, they prefer
their misperceptions. I still get people who are convinced the rotary
will never work because they have "seal problems". Happened to be true
back in '73-74 for a year or two - then the Mazda engineers fixed the
problem - but that is still what many folks remember.
I notice that the comments about
the Sport Aviation article seems to focus is on the fact that the
rotaries were louder (true) and burn more fuel (also true for those PP
engines), but they didn't apparently notice that the rotary beat the
lycoming in power and speed. I mean more power generally requires more
fuel doesn't it? Just shows a basic lack on understanding about
engines in general in my opinion.
I personally believe that a lot of folks
just really don't want to think they paid almost $30K for a Lycoming and a
$4K rotary can beat it (note the PowerSport rotaries are not in the $4K
class {:>)). You should have seen how deflated the Lycoming crowd
was (some of which had spent considerable $$ in "hopping" up their engines)
when Tracy Crook beat them in the Sun & Fun 100 race. You'll
also notice that win did not get any publicity to in any of the
Aviation magazines - because they know where their $$ come from.
You'll also notice they then cancelled the race event shortly thereafter -
reportedly due to insurance considerations - but we all know the REAL reason
{:>). Ok, Ok, it probably was insurance considerations and not the
fact that a rotary was winning air races, but it sounds good
{:>)
Sigh! I mean we know
this is a Lycoming centric world - Well, that just means more good cores for
the rest of us {:>)
Ed
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 10:24
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions
from a potential rotaryphile
Welcome to the club!
I am frequently on the PPRuNe forum
and I ran a cross a Wankel thread, with lots of misinformation about the
Rotary.
At least I tried to steer them in the
right direction....
TJ
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 9:08
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions
from a potential rotaryphile
I'm a bit surprised hearing it came
from Al Wick as he was on this list for a while. I thought he had
a better understanding of what was going on with the rotary. But,
you're right a little knowledge means incomplete knowledge which can be
dangerous.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 3:35
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:
Questions from a potential rotaryphile
Ed Anderson wrote:
Clearly a person who has "heard" things about the
rotary, but does not know anything about
them.
Indeed.
Rich was quoting Al Wick, from 5/20
posting on the COZY_builders
mail list, "COZY: Fuel issues with
auto conversions".
A *little* knowledge is a
dangerous thing.
.
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Sunday, May 21, 2006 7:48 AM
Subject:
[FlyRotary] Questions from a potential rotaryphile
In a
different forum, not related specifically to engines, the
following was stated,
"...Rotary is different issue. Their unusual combustion
chamber requires them
to mix 2 cycle oil with each tank. If
they don't their compression seals
die prematurely. Just like
your boat motor mix, I don't see it as a big
deal. In addition,
if they use aviation fuel, they develop power drop on
departure
and have to replace all their plugs before next flight.
This
happens every 20 hours. They don't have solution for
this."
What is the experience that you are having? Is there
any truth to this. If not true, where might this info have come
from??
thanks,
Rich
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/