Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #37917
From: <Lehanover@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:40:44 EDT
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
In a message dated 6/18/2007 9:42:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:
On 6/18/07, Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.com> wrote:
Well Ed,
It looks like you've got yourself a new intake project.  Didn't Richard Sohn try running side and peripheral intake porting on his one rotor?  I vaguely remember him mentioning it and that he abandoned the idea.  I think it had something to do with the complexity of the dual runners and that he was satisfied with the idle characteristics of the p-port?  Maybe Richard can comment?
 
Mark S.
I have never seen a 6 port in road racing. Only 4 ports with bridge ports or periphery ports.
 
Too much port and runner cross section reduces velocity and moves peak power way up the RPM band.
 
Porting is used to change timing, like changing cams. The smallest runners and port faces have the highest velocity. Better idle great mid range and good peak HP at a lower RPM. 
 
For any fixed RPM, the higher velocity gets in more mixture than a lower velocity.
 
Every day some kid grinds up some huge ports for his rotary and ends up with a dog of a street engine. Less HP than the stock engine.
 
You cannot fool mother nature, or Bernoulli.
 
Lynn E. Hanover




See what's free at AOL.com.
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster