Return-Path: Received: from out003.verizon.net ([206.46.170.103] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 570641 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:49:06 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.170.103; envelope-from=rotary.coot@verizon.net Received: from [67.225.117.20] ([65.239.57.18]) by out003.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20041217034831.KTPY1106.out003.verizon.net@[67.225.117.20]> for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:48:31 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: res0c5l1@incoming.verizon.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 19:53:41 -0800 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" From: Ken Welter Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ellison vs EFI Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1108866864==_ma============" X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out003.verizon.net from [65.239.57.18] at Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:48:29 -0600 --============_-1108866864==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > Hp don't mean anything as its all in CFM and at that time tne >biggest they offered was 350 CFM which will work fine on the big >lunged ancient airplane motors but we need free high flowing >carburetors, about 650 to 700 CFM is about right. > > >I'm not following you here. Why is 180 HP more CFM for us than for >an O-360? I just sent them a question to see what the bore >diameter is on the top 3 sizes they list. > >I did notice that there was a FAQ on the Ellison page that says they >don't recommend auto fuel, since it could damage components in the >TBI. I'm not sure how much this is real, vs CYA. Ellison doesn't >seem all that much in favor of auto engine conversions in the first >place. > >Rusty (already talked to Van's once today, danger, danger) Look at the crude intake manifold on a Lycosoris, it don't have any CFM ether as they just rely on the big slow moving piston to suck like hell to get the air in, very crude !!! I am currently running a 48 Weber, I did have a 51 Weber and there was a definite loss in power dropping to the 48. There are ways to control the mixture on a Weber if interested. I am considering playing with fuel injection but I plan on using a Weber as the throttle body so the if anything goes wrong with the injection I can just flip a switch and change over to the carb. Ken --============_-1108866864==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" [FlyRotary] Re: Ellison vs EFI
  Hp don't mean anything as its all in CFM and at that time tne biggest they offered was 350 CFM which will work fine on the big lunged ancient airplane motors but we need free high flowing carburetors, about 650 to 700 CFM is about right.
 
 
I'm not following you here.  Why is 180 HP more CFM for us than for an O-360?   I just sent them a question to see what the bore diameter is on the top 3 sizes they list. 
 
I did notice that there was a FAQ on the Ellison page that says they don't recommend auto fuel, since it could damage components in the TBI.  I'm not sure how much this is real, vs CYA.  Ellison doesn't seem all that much in favor of auto engine conversions in the first place. 
 
Rusty (already talked to Van's once today, danger, danger) 

  Look at the crude intake manifold on a Lycosoris, it don't have any CFM ether as they just rely on the big slow moving piston to suck like hell to get the air in, very crude !!!
 I am currently running a 48 Weber, I did have a 51 Weber and there was a definite loss in power dropping to the 48.
 There are ways to control the mixture on a Weber if interested.
 I am considering playing with fuel injection but I plan on using a Weber as the throttle body so the if anything goes wrong with the injection I can just flip a switch and change over to the carb.
 Ken
--============_-1108866864==_ma============--