Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.70] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 548862 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:50:31 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.70; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20041129025002.HULQ2051.imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:50:02 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: high oil temps must end Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:50:24 -0600 Message-ID: <000c01c4d5be$2d249050$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4D58B.E28A2050" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4D58B.E28A2050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I would say that if you enlarge your oil inlet to 38 sq inch and still = do not get the relief from your oil temps that you might reconsider the use = of the core for the oil cooler. 38 sq inch should provide plenty of air = for the oil cooler.=20 =20 Thanks for all the info Ed. My water core inlets are at about 48 sq = inches IIRC. The ducts are even reasonably well shaped, so that explains the = fine performance of the water cooling. =20 =20 I'm still convinced that the evap core will be superior to the 2nd gen = oil cooler, if all other installation details are equal. Unfortunately, my = evap core installation is less than optimal, but is probably better than a = 2nd gen cooler could ever be in the space available. With any luck, going = to 38 sq in will give me more oil cooling than I need. If I end up with too = much oil, and water cooling, I'll just have to add that supercharger I've = been looking at :-) =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (3000 fpm or bust... something)=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4D58B.E28A2050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
I would say that if you enlarge = your oil=20 inlet to 38 sq inch and still do not get the relief from your oil temps = that you=20 might reconsider the use of the core for the oil cooler.  38 sq = inch should=20 provide plenty of air for the oil cooler. 
 
Thanks for all the info Ed.  My water = core inlets=20 are at about 48 sq inches IIRC.  The ducts are even reasonably well = shaped,=20 so that explains the fine performance of the water cooling. =20
 
I'm still convinced that the evap = core will be=20 superior to the 2nd gen oil cooler, if all other installation = details are=20 equal.  Unfortunately, my evap core installation is less than = optimal, but=20 is probably better than a 2nd gen cooler could ever be in the space=20 available.  With any luck, going to 38 sq in will give me more oil = cooling=20 than I need.  If I end up with too much oil, and water cooling, = I'll just=20 have to add that supercharger I've been looking at=20 :-)  
 
Cheers,
Rusty (3000 fpm or bust...=20 something) 
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C4D58B.E28A2050--