X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 12:15:48 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-641198@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <walter@advancedpilot.com>
Received: from secure5.liveoakhosting.com ([64.49.254.21] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.7)
  with ESMTPS id 641078 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 08 Aug 2005 10:37:33 -0400
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.49.254.21; envelope-from=walter@advancedpilot.com
Received: (qmail 31578 invoked by uid 2520); 8 Aug 2005 09:36:36 -0500
Received: from 216.107.97.170 by secure5.liveoakhosting.com (envelope-from <walter@advancedpilot.com>, uid 2020) with qmail-scanner-1.25st 
 (clamdscan: 0.84/921. perlscan: 1.25st.  
 Clear:RC:0(216.107.97.170):. 
 Processed in 0.051695 secs); 08 Aug 2005 14:36:36 -0000
Received: from 216-107-97-170.wan.networktel.net (HELO ?10.0.1.4?) (216.107.97.170)
  by rs5.liveoakhosting.com with SMTP; 8 Aug 2005 09:36:36 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622)
In-Reply-To: <list-640661@logan.com>
References: <list-640661@logan.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--824296804
X-Original-Message-Id: <0ae681074cd41652ceab433aaae33ab6@advancedpilot.com>
From: Walter Atkinson <walter@advancedpilot.com>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lower Cowl Air Temperature - Induction Air - Heater Air Temp
X-Original-Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:36:31 -0500
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622)


--Apple-Mail-1--824296804
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=ISO-8859-1;
	format=flowed

Scott:

** We can have our beliefs to be=A0whatever we want but injected engines=20=

can=A0achieve a greater efficiency than carbed ones...**

I used to believe that until I saw the TESTED DATA.  It is possible to=20=

have excellent F:A balance in carbed engines.  I've done it and seen it=20=

in the data.  I do grant you that it is far less predictable and=20
repeatable.

Maybe we are using different definitions for vaporization and=20
atomization,  Atomizing the fuel is turning it into little liquid=20
droplets (which don't burn).  Vaporization is turning it into a gas=20
which does burn.

Walter=

--Apple-Mail-1--824296804
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset=ISO-8859-1

Scott:


<fontfamily><param>Arial</param><smaller>** We can have our beliefs to
be=A0whatever we want but injected engines can=A0achieve a greater
efficiency than carbed ones...**


I used to believe that until I saw the TESTED DATA.  It is possible to
have excellent F:A balance in carbed engines.  I've done it and seen
it in the data.  I do grant you that it is far less predictable and
repeatable.


Maybe we are using different definitions for vaporization and
atomization,  Atomizing the fuel is turning it into little liquid
droplets (which don't burn).  Vaporization is turning it into a gas
which does burn.


Walter</smaller></fontfamily>=

--Apple-Mail-1--824296804--