Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.100; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com
Message-ID: <001a01c79d9e$09360fc0$2402a8c0@edward2>
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-2064067@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] intake tubing
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 20:54:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="utf-8";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tony,

One thing to keep in mind, is that many ideas (some of them even good) 
are/have been posted on this list.  Often to make them happen takes one 
individual to push forward simply because they believe the idea to be 
worthwhile.  Frequently, until the individual produces the product and shows 
its utility - there is no overwhelming or even visible support for the idea.

I think that sometimes we are guilty of not paying close attention to an 
idea and the other thing is when $$ starts getting mentioned.  Right now 
(unless I missed a post), the cost to you is going to about $3000.   You 
hope to produce the tubes (or the intake?) for around $400.

Now, that sound  reasonable to me, however, until you have a unit built and 
shown that it works at least as well as other approaches, I doubt you are 
going to get many checks (might be wrong about that).  I recall a year or so 
ago, we had an individual briefly on the list who was going to make 
carbon-fiber intakes - but, nothing came of it.  So a lot of ideas, some 
good, some not so good,  have come and gone, but many simply fall by the way 
side regardless of merit, unless a determined individual runs with it.

 So not trying to discourage you - just the opposite, but if you are waiting 
for a ground swell of support, then I'm afraid you are going to be 
disappointed.


 Build a better mouse-trap and they will come.

This is just my 0.02 worth.

I would be interested in anything you care to reveal about what Dave at 
Mazdatrix said about the Paul-Port, off the list if you prefer.

Best Regards

Ed

Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.com
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <tonyslongez@cox.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 8:01 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] intake tubing


> Does everyone understand what it is I'm trying to do with this intake 
> tubing or am I speaking greek? I'm so tired of P.L. and his inebriated 
> remarks. I swear he is on a binge right now.
>
>  Do we as a rotory community not need this type of lite weight aluminum 
> tubing that is perfectly matched to our ports? I thought one of the big 
> obstacals was our intake manifolds have things changed and I wasn't aware? 
> OR is everyone happy with using a Paul -Port. Which by the way talking to 
> Dave at Mazdatrix revealed several inconsistencies in his P-port 
> reporting.
>
> This whole thing started becasue I can't find a manifold that isn't a 
> chunk of extruded hunk of aluminum that weighs more than my car.
> Seems easy enought to just weld four tubes of the correct size to an 
> aluminum plate. and that is it. We can mandral bend them have them 
> straight what ever. I guess I'm surprized by the groups reaction or lack 
> of.
>
> Tony
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub: 
> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html