X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail09.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.190] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTPS id 980119 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 01 Jun 2005 00:46:11 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.190; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au Received: from george (d220-236-25-37.dsl.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.236.25.37]) by mail09.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j514jJGY010298 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 14:45:21 +1000 Message-ID: <003501c56665$68f71340$2519ecdc@george> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 213 mph 75% cruise (was: RX-8 6 port Intake - Like, complicated....) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 14:50:18 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0032_01C566B9.3A22A8A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C566B9.3A22A8A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David, I agree, but if it has as much at 7500 - that's sufficient. I couldn't understand why Don wanted a 6 port, he seemed to understand = the complexity of the manifold design. I figure Don is one chap who have = the skills and facility to make it work well! George ( down under) **** Well, if the 4 port has more torque than the 6 port 'at 7500 = rpm', then the 4 port has more power than the 6 port "at 7500 rpm" FWIW, = Dave McC On 01/06/2005, at 7:49 AM, Echo Lake Fishing Resort (Georges Boucher) = wrote: Don't forget that 247hp is at 9000rpm, there is probably little = difference at 7500rpm. 7500rpm is probably max. wit5h a 2.85:1 re-drive. Georges B. Christavia Mk IV. 13b NA -------Original Message------- ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C566B9.3A22A8A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
David,
I agree, but if it has as much at = 7500 -=20 that's sufficient.
I couldn't understand why Don wanted a = 6 port, he=20 seemed to understand the complexity of the manifold design. I figure Don = is one=20 chap who have the skills and facility to make it work well!
George ( down under)
****=20 Well, if the 4 port has more torque than the 6 port 'at 7500 rpm', = then the 4=20 port has more power than the 6 port "at 7500 rpm" FWIW, Dave McC
On = 01/06/2005, at 7:49 AM, Echo Lake Fishing Resort (Georges Boucher)=20 wrote:

 Don't = forget=20 that 247hp is at 9000rpm, there is probably little difference at = 7500rpm.=20 7500rpm is probably max. wit5h a 2.85:1 = re-drive.
Georges=20 B.
 Christavia=20 Mk IV. 13b = NA
-------Original=20 = Message-------
 
------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C566B9.3A22A8A0--