|
|
Sorry, Bill, I was referring to his ½ fuel
flow problem
Ed
From: Rotary motors in aircraft
[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Bill Eslick
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009
8:59 AM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Looking
for a rear counterweight
Not sure of which
situation you are referring.?
Bill
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
wrote:
Yes, I would no longer consider porting a six port myself,
but back in 92 I knew a bit less about the rotary engine. Besides, if the
rebuilder had either talked me out of it OR had not charged me for it, the
situation would have been a bit different.
I personally prefer the turbo block for porting myself.
I used the Racing Beat Street
port on my turbo block and it really woke it up.
By the way, did Jason get his situation sorted out?
From: Rotary
motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
On Behalf Of Bill Eslick
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009
12:06 AM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Looking
for a rear counterweight
Ed,
I guess you have seen the Mazdatrix web site where they discourage the whole
porting thing with a 6-port. Just the opposite of what Lynn proposes.
Bill
On Thu,
Jan 29, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
wrote:
That's interesting to hear, Bill. My first engine was
an 86 N/A that was suppose to have been street ported (I paid to have it done),
but when I later tore it down, much to my surprise there had been no porting
done. So I ported the next engine myself – at least I got my money's
worth {:>).
|
|