Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 373518 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:27:10 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.08 201-253-122-130-108-20031117) with ESMTP id <20040821182639.ZUNR1792.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:26:39 -0400 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: EM-2 MAP readings Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:26:57 -0500 Message-ID: <001401c487ac$7120b4b0$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C48782.884AACB0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C48782.884AACB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Russell, I think you went to the 42mm bores to gain more intake = velocity. What do you think about that idea now v. the idea of 48mm? =20 Hi Tommy, =20 I wish I could say there was something scientific about my selection, = but in fact, it's just the TB that I got with the wrapover manifold from = Atkins. Considering how poorly the manifold was matched, I can't say I have any = real confidence that the TB was a good choice either. =20 =20 Since Ed was having good results with his 1.75" OD (about 42mm ID) = intake runners, I decided to use those also, along with the 42 mm TB. This = worked very well on the B drive, and smaller prop, but I just don't know if = it's working well on the C drive and monster prop yet. The real test will be trying to get the cruise rpms up to the 7000 range. That's where the restriction would really become a problem. =20 Rusty (just don't know yet) =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C48782.884AACB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Russell, I = think you=20 went to the 42mm bores to gain more intake velocity.  What do you = think=20 about that idea now v. the idea of 48mm?

 

Hi=20 Tommy,

 

I wish I could = say there was=20 something scientific about my selection, but in fact, it's just the TB = that I=20 got with the wrapover manifold from Atkins.  Considering how poorly = the=20 manifold was matched, I can't say I have any real confidence that the TB = was a=20 good choice either.  

 

Since Ed = was having=20 good results with his 1.75" OD (about 42mm ID) intake runners, I decided = to use=20 those also, along with the 42 mm TB.  This worked very well on = the B=20 drive, and smaller prop, but I just don't know if it's working = well on the=20 C drive and monster prop yet.  The real test will be trying to get = the=20 cruise rpms up to the 7000 range.  That's where the restriction = would=20 really become a problem.

 

Rusty (just = don't know=20 yet)     

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C48782.884AACB0--