Rusty,
Sorry to
hear that rev 3 is having problems.
I can relate to the high temp issues though. I’m currently working on my own rev 2 – reworking the
cooling system. I’ve done away
with my large radiator in exchange for 2 evaporator cores. These are (will) be mounted more in
line with the incoming air flow.
I’m curious
about how the temperatures you are seeing now compare to when you had the
turbo. You should have been making
similar horsepower then as well.
Were your temperatures with the turbo also high ?
Steve Brooks
(working on rev 2)
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft
[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behalf
Of Russell Duffy
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004
10:57 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Rev 3 flight
report
Greetings,
I flew
the rev-3 mod today for the first time, and there were no fatalities.
Unfortunately, that's about the end of the good news. I need to spend
some time thinking about this, because it just doesn't make complete sense to
me. Comments will be appreciated.
Cheers,
Rusty
(tired, depressed, confused)
8-17-04 .5 hours / 28.6 total
Flew the
rev-3 setup for the first time, and it’s clear this mod isn’t over.
First, the
plane pulls HARD left on takeoff. Tracy
probably saved me from wrecking the plane with his advice to keep the tailwheel
on the ground initially to use it for extra steering. I made two takeoffs, and while not uncontrollable, it’s not
what I’d like to end up with. I’m
already planning to shim the mount to get the left thrust out.
During climb,
I needed even more right rudder.
If you let off the pedal, it pegs the ball on the right of the
inclinometer. In cruise, the ball
is off to the right about as much as it was off to the left before.
Climb rpm was
only 5650 at 120 mph. This was
just short of 2000 fpm climb, but can’t really be trusted since I had a ceiling
of only 1400 ft to work with. I
really didn’t get established in climb long enough to tell what it was really
doing. Temps go up fast now, but
again, I wasn’t able to climb long enough to find out just how bad it is.
I spend some
time orbiting the airport at 1400 ft, and about 5000 rpm. The temps stabilized at 192 for oil,
and 158 for water. I went to full
throttle for about 15 seconds, and saw a max of about 28 inches MAP at about
170 mph TAS. Forgot to note the
rpm, but I didn’t let it build up anyway.
Temps go up fast.
After the
flight, I did some full throttle runs on the ground to look at the MAP. With my current setup using the small
plenum I made, I got 5500 rpm (down from yesterday for some reason), at 27.0
MAP. Removing the inlet tubes from
the throttle body gave me 5750 rpm, at 27.3 MAP.
I didn’t
think to check the accuracy of the EM-2 MAP display. I had a picture of my EM-2 when it was the only thing on,
and it read 30.0. That struck me
as odd that it would be exactly 30, then I realized that it gets it’s MAP from
the EC-2, which was not on. I’ve
still got to verify this is correct, but bet that it is.
So, what does
this leave me with. First, I’m not
getting the 6200 static rpm that I think Tracy
reported with his (still unverified) 13B setup. On the other hand, I must be making considerably more HP
than before, because the temps are climbing at an alarming rate,
and nothing has been changed on the cooling system, aside from losing the
EWP, which has no effect on oil of course. There is a possibility that my prop is larger in some way
than Tracy’s, though that’s a long
shot.
If the MAP
readings are correct on the EM-2, I’m losing about 3 inches of MAP in the
throttle body alone. My ports are
on the engine side of the throttle body, which is only about 4 inches
long. The throttle body is the
same ID as the intake runners, so am I losing 3 inches of MAP every 4 inches of
intake runner. This is depressing,
though as always, there's significant room for improvement.