Hey Ed,

 

there may be more to that!:

 

How about "outlawed", "heresy installation?", "impossible", "rebellious", " no way", "450 degrees", hey I'll find more if you want!!

 

About the "crooked":

 

a) Any Tracy-parts in there??

b) Any prop- offset degrees??

 

TJ :)

 

On 8/31/07, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:

Hey, Kevin, you can't talk about my innovative mounting approach that way.  Side ways, 90 degrees, "Plugs Up" all OK - but not crooked {:>).

 

Ed

----- Original Message -----

From: kevin lane

To: Rotary motors in aircraft

Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 1:21 AM

Subject: [FlyRotary] design steps

 

I have purchased a turrentine renesis to eventually replace the O-320 in my -6A.  I was playing with intake manifold ideas and realized that the engine mount could dictate the design possibilities significantly, especially with the exhaust, which requires three tubes (like my prior 20B).  the Schertz beam type mount puts the diagonal tubes way outboard, and, it seems to me, provides solid mounting tabs for radiators and such.  the standard bed-mount looks like the front diagonals will conflict with the exhaust and affect my intake manifold design (thinking same side).  I haven't built a plywood firewall yet, just eyeballing things.

    when I was building my rv-8/20B the engine mount was ordered and I worked around it.  are these the normal steps, or do I need to mock up both concurrently?  is there that many choices in the mount geometry for the -6A?  would changing my plane to a taildragger benefit me much?  Ed's no help 'cause he got his in 90 degrees crooked! :-)    kevin (portland/cape cod trip Saturday)