X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-m15.mx.aol.com ([64.12.138.205] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 941293 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 12 May 2005 11:24:45 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.138.205; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-m15.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r1.7.) id q.1c1.283db32b (4446) for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 11:23:56 -0400 (EDT) From: WRJJRS@aol.com Message-ID: <1c1.283db32b.2fb4cf0c@aol.com> Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 11:23:56 EDT Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: silly intake idea of the day To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1115911436" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5012 -------------------------------1115911436 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/12/2005 5:52:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, 13brv3@bellsouth.net writes: They also show a graph of short vs tall air horns: _http://www.twminduction.com/AirHorn/short_tall.html_ (http://www.twminduction.com/AirHorn/short_tall.html) This seems to give the impression that short is better. The question is what their definition of short and tall is. If short means the shorty type, then the intake just saved some space. Rusty, The short vs tall depends on the engine it's used on. On a high RPM piston engine a short intake tract is usually best. If you have a intake that isn't "tuned" than the least restritive intake will produce more power. As a for instance on one bike I raced, a FZR 1000 Yamaha the intake tract was so short that you could almost touch an intake valve through the carb! The carbs were 43mm BTW 4X. It shows why PP engines work better at high RPM. If you have a short intake, (say less than 10") use whichever airhorns fit. Bill Jepson -------------------------------1115911436 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 5/12/2005 5:52:46 AM Pacific Standard Time,=20 13brv3@bellsouth.net writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D3>

They=20= also show=20 a graph of short vs tall air horns: http://www.tw= minduction.com/AirHorn/short_tall.html =20 This seems to give the impression that short is better. The question= is=20 what their definition of short and tall is. If short means the short= y=20 type, then the intake just saved some space. =20

Rusty,

The short vs tall depends on the engine it's used on. On a high R= PM=20 piston engine a short intake tract is usually best. If you have a inta= ke=20 that isn't "tuned" than the least restritive intake will produce more power.= As=20 a for instance on one bike I raced, a FZR 1000 Yamaha the intake tract was s= o=20 short that you could almost touch an intake valve through the carb! The carb= s=20 were 43mm BTW 4X. It shows why PP engines work better at high RPM.

If you have a short intake, (say less than 10") use whichever=20 airhorns fit.

Bill Jepson

-------------------------------1115911436--