X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from xproxy.gmail.com ([66.249.82.199] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.7) with ESMTP id 965665 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:58:43 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.249.82.199; envelope-from=russell.duffy@gmail.com Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id h30so377541wxd for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:57:58 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:importance:in-reply-to:x-mimeole; b=U91IAyfScJ7Yjf4jiSX/N71UHUu5oKg1UG7rnuipd/v9DJZEqMJpQ6qxJiQZj+SfAkPAR/b3s9AyInYF0w2DTZemJoly03ky58G0pSlFDo+2f3L2TNL3YZWaOJ+vn0m/7RwvF4zr2CTVs6Xpr19mSFhFcNyrHIYBT5MHWiMj6uE= Received: by 10.70.118.5 with SMTP id q5mr1567472wxc; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:57:58 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from rd ( [65.6.194.9]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id i20sm3555071wxd.2006.02.02.16.57.57; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:57:58 -0800 (PST) From: "Russell Duffy" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Muffler options Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 18:57:58 -0600 Message-ID: <003601c6285c$e053d310$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0037_01C6282A.95B96310" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C6282A.95B96310 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I know you NA guys have all kinds of trouble with mufflers, but could = the turbo actually help by smoothing out all the nasty pulses?=20 =20 Hi John, =20 I'd guess that a turbo would be much easier on the muffler, since the = pulses are dampened, and the temps are lower (lots of heat transferred from the turbo to the rest of your engine compartment ). On the other hand, a turbo that's controllable, will have a big wastegate like the one in = your pic (nice BTW). That exhaust bypasses the turbo completely, though it = still has to make a few turns to get out. =20 =20 FWIW, I talked to Burns Stainless about those mufflers, and decided that they weren't a good idea for an NA arrangement. I think I was worried = about the heat, and that they wouldn't really muffle that well. Can't quite recall. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty=20 =20 =20 PS- don't click on this link. You've been warned :-) =20 http://members.iinet.net.au/~pontipak/redsquare.html =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C6282A.95B96310 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
I know=20 you NA guys have all kinds of trouble with mufflers, but could the turbo = actually help by smoothing out all the nasty pulses? =
 
Hi John,
 
I'd guess that a turbo would be = much easier on the=20 muffler, since the pulses are dampened, and the temps are = lower (lots=20 of heat transferred from the turbo to the rest of your engine = compartment=20 <g>).  On the other hand, a turbo that's controllable, will = have a=20 big wastegate like the one in your pic (nice BTW).  That=20 exhaust bypasses the turbo completely, though it still has to = make a=20 few turns to get out.  
 
FWIW, I talked to Burns Stainless about those = mufflers,=20 and decided that they weren't a good idea for an NA arrangement.  I = think I=20 was worried about the heat, and that they wouldn't really = muffle that=20 well.  Can't quite recall.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty 
 
 
PS- don't click on this link.  You've = been warned=20 :-)
 
http://memb= ers.iinet.net.au/~pontipak/redsquare.html
  
------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C6282A.95B96310--