Message

Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.71] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2779997 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:39:42 -0500 Received: from rad ([68.212.0.112]) by imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20031202033941.CHYV1942.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rad> for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2003 22:39:41 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "Flyrotary List" Subject: More wacky water pump plans Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 21:39:43 -0600 Message-ID: <001401c3b885$eca20c70$6001a8c0@rad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C3B853.A2079C70" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C3B853.A2079C70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings, =20 I'm coming pretty close to ordering my radiator, and I think I've = decided on sort of a hybrid water pump layout. My current plan, unless someone can convince me otherwise, is to have my radiator made into two separate = rads, via a divided end tank on both ends. The mechanical water pump will = feed the front of one half. The rear of that half will go into an EWP, then output into the rear of the other half of the radiator. The front of = the second half will return to the engine. =20 =20 The theory is that I keep the stock pump, with an EWP as backup in case = I lose the belts (which I consider the most likely failure mode). With either the EWP, or the stock pump working alone, there will be some restriction to flow, which will be just dandy for cruise. For climb, = I'll always run both pumps, giving more than stock flow. I can even use the stock thermostat if I want to. =20 =20 What do you think? Brilliant, or stupid... don't answer that. =20 Cheers, Rusty (great comment censored, but Paul will see it ) ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C3B853.A2079C70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Greetings,

I'm coming = pretty close to=20 ordering my radiator, and I think I've decided on sort of a hybrid water = pump=20 layout. My current plan, unless someone can convince me otherwise, = is to=20 have my radiator made into two separate rads, via a divided end tank on = both=20 ends. The mechanical water pump will feed the front of one = half. The=20 rear of that half will go into an EWP, then output into the rear of the = other=20 half of the radiator. The front of the second half will return to = the=20 engine.

The theory is = that I keep=20 the stock pump, with an EWP as backup in case I lose the belts (which I = consider=20 the most likely failure mode). With either the EWP, or the = stock=20 pump working alone, there will be some restriction to flow, which will = be just=20 dandy for cruise. For climb, I'll always run both pumps, giving = more than=20 stock flow. I can even use the stock thermostat if I want = to. =20

What do you = think? =20 Brilliant, or stupid... don't answer that.

Cheers,

Rusty (great = comment=20 censored, but Paul will see it = <g>)

------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C3B853.A2079C70--