Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <414D0C5C.7070208@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:34:36 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Renesis Temps, Lynn?
References: <list-420926@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-420926@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tracy Crook wrote:
> There are a few clues that lead me to think that it may be the longer (and additional) exhaust path through the block that leads to the higher coolant temps.   One of them is that the higher temps don't seem to be causing a problem since the temps don't seem to go up as much when power is added.  I.e., the old engine would heat up about 30 degrees when going from low power level flight to high power climb and the Renesis will go up about half that so that they end up being about the same.  Still, it's very disconcerting to see them up so high to start with.  Another clue is that the coolant temp after the rads is about the same as on old engine (higher coolant temp delta through rad).

Tracy, would it be possible to pull the exhaust manifold back far enough 
to coat the exhaust ports with some of that ceramic paint coating?  It 
would be interesting to see if it can take it, and how long it would last.

-- 
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
   alleviated by information and experience."
                                   Veeduber