Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.71; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net
Message-ID: <4235066C.6050801@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:35:08 -0600
From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: peripheral ports
References: <list-791653@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-791653@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Paul wrote:

>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: Russell Duffy <mailto:13brv3@bellsouth.net>
>     To: Rotary motors in aircraft <mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>     Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 12:56 PM
>     Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: peripheral ports
>
>     Thanks, Richard....I may just order the Racing Beat lightweight
>     aluminum housings. They are available unported, stock ported or
>     street ported, etc.  Paul Conner 
>      
>     Good luck.  The rear and intermediate housings have been available
>     for quite some time, but the front housing has been "almost ready"
>     for a couple years now.  The last time I talked to them was
>     January, and I got the same story.  
>      
>     BTW, when you call them, ask how they feel about peripheral ports
>     in aircraft use, and you may forget the whole thing.  Using the PP
>     for aircraft can certainly be done, but there's no slam dunk
>     recipe for it at the moment, unless you want to buy a Powerports
>     engine.  At the moment, there are some good projects going on, but
>     until they get to the point of flying, and providing real world
>     data, it's far from a sure thing. 
>      
>     There's also considerable doubt whether a good PP engine can
>     actually out produce a good side port (ported REW housings) engine
>     in the rpm's we're running.  I'd be willing to bet that the side
>     port will be more civilized across the rpm range too.  
>      
>     Don't take this wrong.  I desperately want to see some of these
>     project get completed, and I hope it's a great as they think it
>     will be.  Just can't say for sure until it actually happens. 
>      
>     Cheers,
>     Rusty
>        
>
>     I have been giving this a lot of thought, also, Rusty.   Most
>     articles I read about the PPorts talk about the engine not idling
>     (or even running) below 2000 rpm's.  That is 1000 prop rpm's for
>     me....I would float too much once in ground effect.  Also, it
>     appears that the PPorts seem to give the most advantage at rpm's
>     much higher than I intend to operate at.  Especially with a 2.17:1
>     PRSU, I need to get my power around 6000 rpm's so that the prop
>     tips do not go supersonic, etc.
>          Sounding like the street ported 4-port housings I already
>     purchased might be my best option after all.  I've read that the
>     street port gives a boost to top end power without sacrificing
>     idle or transition speeds, and a low, dependable idle is a nice
>     thing to have on short final.  Harder to go around once the engine
>     quits.  Paul Conner
>

I like the idea of p-ports, but quicker, cheaper power might be in a 
2.85 drive & new prop. That won't shed the weight, though.

Charlie