-------------- Original message --------------

> Rusty is right when he says it is taking those of us building P.Ports
> forever. It would be so much easier if the final product did not have
> to be stuffed inside a cowl.
>
> The design of the intake manifold to include both ram and alt air has
> taken me six months, mostly spent on bad ideas that I was slow to
> realize had fatal flaws. What needed to be brought together (to make
> ME happy) was cold side fuel, ram and alt air, and accurately tuned
> pipes, combined and shaped to tuck inside my Tailwind's cowl. A
> couple of weeks ago, the pieces of the puzzle suddenly fell in place.
> I just woke up one morning knowing how to do it. I am amazed to be
> able to say that the intake that will meet all the above objectives,
> is doable and that I am ordering materials this week as soon as I
> decide whether to make the first one out of steel or aluminum.
>
> The performance of the P port is well documented. Power Sport has
> proven that it can operate over a wide power band and deliver the
> significant HP. Most people I have talked with have recommended a
> relatively small port, opening late for best performance in our rpm
> range which is below 7500 rpm. So that is what I have done. There is
> nothing about building a p port that will take much time or money
> once the size, timing and intake manifold are figured out.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, January 5, 2005, at 01:13 AM, Lehanover@aol.com wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 1/4/2005 11:31:46 PM Central Standard Time,
> > 13brv3@bellsouth.net writes:
> >
> > << I know PP is one of Lynn's favorite subjects, so maybe he'll chime
> > in here.
> > I want to believe, really.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rusty
> >>>
> >
> >
> > Richard Sohn has both on his single rotor. I believe he said the side
> > port
> > had no advantage. From a standstill the Pport is far more tractable
> > than the
> > bridge ported engine. I have both style engines. If you make your
> > own, you will
> > be controlling the overlap and the closing point. So the Pport will be
> > as
> > tractable as you make it.
> >
> > Others have built the butterfly close to the rotor housing to improve
> > idle
> > and off idle performance. My car has runners tuned for about 8,800
> > RPM. Very
> > short. In the aircraft the runners would be much longer, and there
> > might be an
> > argument for moving the butterfly to get a good idle. The long runner
> > at well
> > below ambient pressure provides a large volume that fills with exhaust
> > gas at
> > idle, acting like a vacuum cleaner. The short runner just has less
> > volume, so it
> > screws up the idle a bit less.
> >
> > When I get some time I will build a Pport 13B with well over 200 HP.
> > Starting
> > with little overlap and a small port and going up to way too big. And
> > dyno
> > at each step.
> > We need to get pointed in the right direction on this stuff and quit
> > spinning
> > our wheels.
> >
> > If you turbo at very low levels I see a very late closing intake Pport
> > and a
> > very late opening for very little overlap at all. Off idle would stink
> > a bit,
> > but once the boost starts to over come some of the reversion caused by
> > compression, things would pick up nicely. With maybe high pressure
> > mechanical
> > injection between the spark plugs. just before TDC. Just some ideas
> >
> >
> > Lynn E. Hanover
> >
> >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >
>
>
> >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html