Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:45:15 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.84] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 3000914 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:16:25 -0500 Received: from user-33qt49n.dialup.mindspring.com ([199.174.145.55] helo=Carol) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AuOYy-00045q-00; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:16:24 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <007d01c3f831$7756d090$0000a398@Carol> From: "sqpilot@earthlink" X-Original-To: "flyrotary" , "ACRE NL" Subject: exhaust X-Original-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:16:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 My 13b engine is ready to run....I ordered a VAM muffler, but since it has not yet happened, I was wondering if I could get away with using the stock cast iron manifold with a straight pipe attached to it, which would exit through the bottom of the cowling. I should mention that this is on a pusher. George Graham told me that he was using a straight, (or slightly bent) pipe, and possibly Perry Mick is or was using the stock cast iron manifold? My thinking is that although it is heavy, it might possibly absorb a lot of the initial heat as it is exiting the exhaust ports, acting like a heat collector, and I might not need expensive inconel or 321 stainless after the exhaust goes through the stock manifold first? Would the cast iron manifold absorb much of the heat and possibly muffle some of the noise as it is bounced around inside of the stock manifold? I'm probably grasping at straws, but with all the knowledge and experience in this group, I figure it wouldn't hurt to ask. Thanks to all for your opinions and advice. Paul Conner, 13b powered SQ2000