Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.69; envelope-from=CBarber@TexasAttorney.net
From: "Christopher Barber" <CBarber@TexasAttorney.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] motor decisions!
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:07:19 -0600
Message-ID: <OOECJAJLPPEPJMHNKCBHCEEDPBAA.CBarber@TexasAttorney.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <list-2362389@logan.com>

I went through this same choice a few years ago for my Velocity SE/FG.  It
has a minimum HP recommendation of 160hp (Lyc I-320) from the factory. That
being said, I believe the large majority of SE's (the smaller Velocity) are
flying with 180 to 200+ hp. According to Velo, Inc's website the 160 hp SE's
performance numbers are not bad at all (I know, marketing and all that, but
Velo, Inc seems to have a history of attempting NOT to over hype reality too
much, IMAO)

IIRC, the 2nd gen 13b was rated at about 160 hp without modification in the
car.  When I was researching this a gentleman from Oz by the name of Leon
(who, btw, is not well liked by Paul L.  Also, I think he had some serious
medical issues) was gracious enough to provide me much personal
correspondence that led me to research that led me to choose the 13b over
the 20b.  Leon was confidant, as were others, that you should be able to
produce between 180 - 200 hp with a N/A street ported 13b.  The 20b is
heavier and as has been stated, overkill for a 160 to 200 hp bird (even
though I am envious of Al G's install <g>).

Mistral Engines states their N/A option, which is based on a 2nd gen N/A
Mazda 13b is rated at 190 hp. (we are using the Mistral intake). If you need
more than this and/or wish to fly higher the 13b can be turbo'ed....as we
plan to do down the road. I haven't heard much lately, but I hear/read that
the Renesis may not be a good candidate for turbo.....at least currently.

So far we have not had problems finding parts for the 2nd gen (89-91)
engine.  As a matter of fact we have several rotors/housing/E-shafts sitting
in the hangar right now...from boat anchor to nice condition.  Of course,
who knows what the future holds.

Soooooo, what are you wanting to build????????????????  It could make a
difference.

All the best,

Chris

Christopher Barber
Attorney and Counselor at Law
5116 Bissonnet, No 418
Bellaire, Texas 77401

Serving the Needs of Senior Texans through
Planning with Purpose

281-464-LAWS (5297)
281-754-4168 Fax
www.TexasAttorney.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On
Behalf Of Andrew Martin
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 11:21 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] motor decisions!


Hi
I have a 20b and about to start building a plane that is designed for a
IO 360. It has been suggested to me that I should change to a 2 rotor to
save weight. I’ve gone through the archives but didn’t really find any
pro’ and con’s of 3 or 2 rotors other than the max power available.
The plane will be used almost exclusively for long X-country cruising
once the bugs are worked out and hours flown off.
If my estimated max power required due to VNE is around 200hp, is the
Renesis always the engine of choice or are there advantages to keeping
the 20b, accepting the weight penalty and letting the engine loaf along.
I originally presumed the 20b would be better for me especially when at
my gross weight of 2420 lbs. but now I am unsure, so to change now
rather than later would be easier.
Any help from anyone flying either engine, and points that governed your
engine of choice would be greatly appreciated.

Regards
Andrew Martin
Western Australia
 

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html