Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.201.245.36; envelope-from=geryvon@videotron.ca
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:21:28 -0400
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?g=E9raldine?= berger-yvon cournoyer <geryvon@videotron.ca>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: A new build begins
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message-id: <003401c47fd0$1a225800$ab244645@YVONCOURNOYER>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
References: <list-360631@logan.com>


    Allo Ernest
Looks like a good buy. Do the rotors rotate freely?
I flew my 1986 - 13B with a carburator at first. The engine ran
very well, but I could never devise a way to lean the mixture at
altitude. My engine would consume 30 litres/hr, from startup to
shutdown. (2.5 hrs flights.) When I removed the carb and
installed a Holley low pressure injection system, the fuel burn
went to 28 litres/hr. Quite probably less when I will learn to
lean more aggressively.
I am still flying with a Mazda 1985 electronic ignition system
and am well satisfied with this system. Quite maintenance free.
I readily agree that the more recent electronic ignition and fuel
injection systems are well worth the investments.
Believe me, you will love flying your rotary.
Good luck and be patient, you will need to.
Yvon.

----- Message d'origine ----- 
De : "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
À : "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Envoyé : 11 août 04 00:48
Objet : [FlyRotary] Re: A new build begins


> Congratulations, Ernest.
>
> Looks like it was somebody's aircraft project looking at the
motor mount.
> If it has a distributor (and assuming that was an original part
of the
> engine) then it is pre 1886.  If you take off the distributor
cap and it
> only has points then its probably pre 1984.  There was a period
before 1986
> when they switched to the crank angle sensor when they had an
"electronic
> ignition) without breaker points but mounted on the distributor
housing.
>
> Personally, I would go with electronic ignition and electronic
fuel
> injection from the get - go.  Carburetors that have not been
modified to
> adjust for altitude changes can pose a bear of a problem.  The
Webber is
> notorious for its difficulty in tuning even at sea level.
>
> But, that's my personal opinion.  Lets hear what others have to
say.
>
> Ed
>
> Ed Anderson
> RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
> Matthews, NC
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:05 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] A new build begins
>
>
> > After two years of waiting out a tepid economy, I finally
have an engine
> > block all my own!!  Just picked it up today, and had to use
the pully
> > system that I built for the airframe to get it off the back
of the
> > truck.  It's a mite ugly right now, but just you wait.
> >
> > My very first question is, "How do I tell which model it is?"
> >
> > Then I'll move on to, "It has a brand new Weber carb.
Considering the
> > development hours and dollars needed in both the engine and
airframe, is
> > it worth swithing to fuel injection or should I just get it
in the air
> > first?"
> >
> > Finally, "It is currently using points. As above, is it worth
the effort
> > to switch it out?"
> >
> > Regardless, the first project will be an engine mount.  I
think I've got
> > a fairly decent idea of what a good mount should look like,
and I've
> > read all the stuff that has been published on the other list.
But any
> > additional input or even a drawing or two would be nice
before I start
> > burning steel tubing.
> >
> > -- 
> > http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
> > "Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
> >    alleviated by information and experience."
> >                                    Veeduber
> >