|
That’s what I figured Tracy. Just hard to compare
performance to know how I'm doing without really knowing how you or anyone else
attained the performance they claimed. Some day I'll work up the courage to make
some low altitude speed runs and see how it looks.
Mike
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:34 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: rpm vs Power was : Throttle limits was Re:
N.A. Renesis to turbo
Sun 100 flown at 500 ft.
Top speed on a normally aspirated
aircraft is always best at sealevel. Best fuel economy is reached up
high.
Tracy
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Mike Wills <rv-4mike@cox.net>
wrote:
When you guys put out these numbers (RPM, speed,
etc...) would also be helpful to know at what altitude. I assume at or close
to sea level? I havent yet made any speed runs at low altitude.
Mike
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 5:27 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: rpm vs Power was : Throttle limits was
Re: N.A. Renesis to turbo
Tracy, if you have the data could you give us
the RPMs you saw at the 205 and 217.5 air speeds?
Dennis H.
Renesis RV-7A
Austin, Tx.
That was 209 and
217.5
the 209 mph speed was with the 2.176 drive
turning a 68 - 71 prop with engine turning 6300 , mixture leaned to 17
gph. On other occasions I could push it to 6400 at best power mixture
burning 20 gph.
The 217.5 mph was with a 2.85 drive turning a 74 - 88
prop with engine turning 7250. I didn't get a good read on the fuel flow
but obviously it would have been higher. I remember requesting priority
landing after the race due to low fuel.
Neither run was
done at best power mixture but leaned a few gph less than
max.
Tracy
|