Received-SPF: softfail
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.102.122.149; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <43C6974D.9080104@nc.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:52:13 -0500
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Cool Tube Muffler Sound Readings
References: <list-923974@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-923974@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bob White wrote:

>That does raise an interesting question though.  At what rpm should I
>run a Lycoming to compare to the rotary at 3000?  For the same prop
>speed, it should be a little over 1000.  It seems that WOT static should
>be a fair comparison point for both engines.  Then how much does the
>prop affect the results?
>
>Bob W.
>
How different does you car's engine sound with WOT on the highway vs 
lugging from a stop uphill? 
The truest comparison would be the same prop RPM at the same engine HP, 
wouldn't it?  Use the same prop on both engines and measure at the same 
prop RPM?

-- 
         ,|"|"|,                                    |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===----        Dyke Delta         |
        o|  d  |o          www.ernest.isa-geek.org  |