Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <47E6CD89.1090500@nc.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:37:13 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Gravity fed carb? peer review
References: <list-2813310@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-2813310@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Michael Silvius wrote:
> Ernest;
>
> No not exactly and it is one of the things I have to think about when
> putting this thing together. I would like to keep the intake length as short
> as possible yet keep the carb low for gravity feed, but that puts it low on
> the port side of the firewall where the exhaust wants to naturally go out.
> It may mean longer exhaust runner to make things go out the starboard side
> of the firewall? and some serious shielding and blast tubes to keep it all
> cool.
>
>   
At this point, consider a plugs up installation.  At this point, I 
really wish I had of went plugs up.  It would have simplified and 
shortened several aspects of my plumbing tremendously.

> I definitely have to consider this issue as well.
>
> thanks:
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
>   
>> Are you comfortable with the intake running close to the exhaust for
>> such a long length?
>>     
>
>
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>
>   


-- 

http://www.ronpaultimeline.com