X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: "Bill Bradburry" Received: from vms173025pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.25] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.6) with ESMTPS id 8054934 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 07 Oct 2015 11:17:53 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.173.25; envelope-from=bbradburry@verizon.net Received: from Desktop ([71.164.185.6]) by vms173025.mailsrvcs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.32.0 64bit (built Jul 16 2014)) with ESMTPA id <0NVU00CSKVSJU540@vms173025.mailsrvcs.net> for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:17:12 -0500 (CDT) X-CMAE-Score: 0 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=MtGvkDue c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=20weQFHSdBTlwctzPCQ/Gw==:117 a=o1OHuDzbAAAA:8 a=oR5dmqMzAAAA:8 a=5lJygRwiOn0A:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=teqftKdIAAAA:8 a=5I7ZRDgBAAAA:20 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=ymGW3UTedSamUWuspXEA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=dmpOll9eaLMA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=CrDozhHT8AGE8hGuzLUA:9 a=W-mKs-963RYHeome:21 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" References: In-reply-to: Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: To P or not... Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:17:14 -0500 Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01D100E9.591F0480" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-index: AdEBCSSMvd01ZVjmQPq1OsnSE99+OQACZKGQ X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D100E9.591F0480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christian, While you are doing that, you could also include some info on your pporting of the Renesis. How did you know where to bore the holes for proper timing and how did you seal the water jacket? I assume that you just plugged up the original ports with JB weld or something? Thanks, One of the other Bills _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 9:04 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: To P or not... can you give details on your custom built hotdog with inox? baffling. Thanks Bill Schertz From: Christian And Tam Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 11:08 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: To P or not... I would agree, yes it worked out to be allot more simpler running 2 x 2" runners than playing with 4 in my opinion and easier to manufactur etc From modifying my engine from a not so good 6 port intake to a simple 2 port intake I gained a good 30-40 hp and 15 k top end The noise also isn't that bad on my renises as I've attached a custom built hotdog underneath with inox baffling which works well Sent from my iPhone On 7 Oct 2015, at 1:34 pm, Mark McClure wrote: Trying to ensure I have a complete knowledge before I make my decision, The P port as shown for the website is exactly what we are looking for. Straight forward power at high rpm. The noise is a factor of energy output which is the same. If I tune a 4 port runner system and get x amount of air into the engine I give y amount of fuel and I have z amount of power and engine exhaust/noise to handle. If I use a P port and get x amount of air and give y amount of fuel it is the exact same z output. It was just easier to get x amount of air into the system. Or am I completely off base. On Oct 6, 2015, at 2:17 PM, William Jepson wrote: Bob, One thing that everyone should get clear is that for aircraft PPorts are almost always superior. At higher RPMs. Also Pports will idle just fine. Good balance and vibration control are the key to good idle. The engine won't make a lot of power at low rpm but that isn't a problem for an aircraft. The rotary makes a better aircraft engine than a car engine! Bill Jepson On Oct 6, 2015 9:14 AM, "Rogers, Bob J." wrote: You should read the description of the effects of P-porting at this website. See bottom entry. http://www.mazdarotary.net/porting.htm And it is loud!!! See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jebl2pWaiWI Bob J. Rogers -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 10:33 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] To P or not... I understand the benefits of P porting the engine. And I think I know the answer to my question but thought I'd verify. Looking for 180-200 hp. I have a freshly overhauled 2004 4 port 13b. If the intake and exhaust are built right I should have no problem getting that power NA. If I P port the intake it will be easier to make 200 or more. however it is just easier to get air into the engine, and therefore more fuel. But it is not by any means more fuel efficient? So therefore if I don't need the power I don't need to P port. Mark -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D100E9.591F0480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Christian,<= /p>

 

While you are doing that, you could = also include some info on your pporting of the Renesis.  How did you = know where to bore the holes for proper timing and how did you seal the water jacket?  I assume that you just plugged up the original ports with = JB weld or something?

 

Thanks,

=

One of the other = Bills

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October = 07, 2015 9:04 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = To P or not...

 

can you give = details on your custom built hotdog with inox? = baffling.

 

Thanks

Bill Schertz

 

Sent: Tuesday, = October 06, 2015 11:08 PM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: To P or not...

 

I would = agree, yes it worked out to be allot more simpler running 2 x 2" runners than = playing with 4 in my opinion and  easier to manufactur = etc

From = modifying my engine from a not so good 6 port intake to a simple 2 port intake I = gained a good 30-40 hp and 15 k top end

The noise = also isn't that bad on my renises as I've attached a custom built hotdog underneath = with inox baffling which works well



Sent from my iPhone


On 7 Oct 2015, at 1:34 pm, Mark McClure <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

Trying to = ensure I have a complete knowledge before I make my = decision,

 

The P port as = shown for the website is exactly what we are looking for. Straight forward = power at high rpm.  The noise is a factor of energy output which is the = same. 

 

If I tune a 4 = port runner system and get x amount of air into the engine I give y amount of = fuel and I have z amount of power and engine exhaust/noise to = handle.

 

If I use a P = port and get x amount of air and give y amount of fuel it is the exact same z output.  It was just easier to get x amount of air into the = system.

 

Or am I = completely off base.

 

Bob,
One thing that everyone should get clear is that for aircraft PPorts are = almost always superior. At higher RPMs. Also Pports will idle just fine. Good = balance and vibration control are the key to good idle. The engine won't make a = lot of power at low rpm but that isn't a problem for an aircraft. The rotary = makes a better aircraft engine than a car engine!

Bill = Jepson

On Oct 6, = 2015 9:14 AM, "Rogers, Bob J." <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

You should = read the description of the effects of P-porting at this website.  See = bottom entry.   http://www.mazdarotary.net/porting.htm  And = it is loud!!!  See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DJebl2pWaiWI

Bob J. Rogers

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in = aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 10:33 AM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] To P or not...

I understand the benefits of P porting the engine.  And I think I = know the answer to my question but thought I'd verify.

Looking for 180-200 hp.  I have a freshly overhauled 2004 4 port = 13b.
If the intake and exhaust are built right I should have no problem = getting that power NA.

If I P port the intake it will be easier to make 200 or more. however it = is just easier to get air into the engine, and therefore more fuel. But it = is not by any means more fuel efficient?

So therefore if I don't need the power I don't need to P port.

Mark


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



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

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01D100E9.591F0480--