X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from poplet2.per.eftel.com ([203.24.100.45] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with ESMTP id 4179335 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 01:30:10 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=203.24.100.45; envelope-from=lendich@aanet.com.au Received: from sv1-1.aanet.com.au (mail.aanet.com.au [203.24.100.34]) by poplet2.per.eftel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914A3173AD5 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:29:28 +0800 (WST) Received: from ownerf1fc517b8 (203.171.92.134.static.rev.aanet.com.au [203.171.92.134]) by sv1-1.aanet.com.au (Postfix) with SMTP id 34614BEC0DD for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:25:31 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: <43385E3467E7424D864D937926C5514A@ownerf1fc517b8> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:25:27 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002B_01CACCF8.8FD64360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100325-1, 03/25/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002B_01CACCF8.8FD64360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike,=20 Your a hard man, however I do agree with both the Mazdatrix and = Powersport results and would expect their operating at optimum = configuration and 100% VE. The question in my mind will we all achieve this in our less than = perfect installations - probably not. I can't remember exactly but powersport was running two PP sizes, 38mm = or 40mm early version and the later 44mm. I believe Bill Jepson is = awaiting the results of a more recent 44mm dyno run. That 210hp may be = the old 44mm HP numbers - can't remember exactly. Then again it may be = the smaller inlet as they were running 6,000 for take-off RPM. A smaller = PP will give greater inlet speeds reflecting in VE. George ( down under) Sorry, not buying it Bill. If you are going to quote speeds here, = quote speeds, not calculated speeds based on so many variables that the = end result is meaningless. That sounds like something we'd see on the = other list, not here. As far as I know, Don's best reported speed is 174 = IAS (and IAS is not all that meaningful either). Based on performance = that Don has actually reported his performance is roughly equivalent to = mine (and I'm both prop and gearing limited). His performance may have = improved since he reported those numbers. In any case I'd prefer to = stick to facts. Speaking of the other list, Paul has video of a PP Renesis on a dyno = at Mazdatrix cranking out near 250HP @7500RPM. And he had the dyno sheet = to prove it. Powersport claimed 210HP at 2700 prop RPM (their reduction = ratio was around 2.2; roughly 6000 engine RPM). I believe they also had = dyno data to prove it. I'm anxious to hear how Mark Stietle's PP 20B = performs. Mike Wills From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 6:25 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Mike, Don didn't report speed. I took his pitch and rpm and figured it. = That speed at cruise is what he would get with no slippage or "lift" = from the prop. Most of the folks with the Catto are actually getting = higher speeds than would be calculated which indicates that the prop is = producing "lift", not slippage.=20 =20 But his engine rpm with that big prop are higher than any I have seen. = With the rotary, rpm =3D horsepower. If you aint making the rpm, you = aint making the horsepower. It doesn't seem to matter what you have = done to the engine.ported, PP, turbo, supercharger. If you look at the = dyno charts that are all over the web, you will see that torque is = pretty flat after about 4K, about 150 ft lbs. The horsepower is around = 150 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, and 200 at 7.5K. You can get more = horsepower than that, but only if you scream it up to 8K or 8.5K. All = the charts I have seen are within 10 horsepower of each other at all = rpms. The difference in total horsepower is always a higher max rpm. =20 We all talk about wanting to cruise at 5800 and make 200 horsepower.it = aint happening! Not with the rotary. =20 Bill B =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Mike Wills Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:17 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Bill, =20 I went back and looked at Don's previous post. Saw reference to climb = performance, RPMs, and temps, but no speed numbers. Has he previously = reported cruise speeds over 200? Last post from him that I saw with any = speed numbers reported 174MPH IAS at 8000. If he's over 200 now, wow = those are good numbers! =20 Mike Wills =20 From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:15 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 =20 Those are the best numbers I have seen with anyone with a Renesis so = far. In fact, I have not heard of numbers that good on any 13B. Don is = getting over 200 MPH with a cruise prop and climbing at over 1400 fpm = with it. The only way he is going to do better is either with an = electric CS prop and/or turbo. If he shaves the prop off to say, 74", = he will get a couple hundred more rpm, but will probably lose in total = thrust. Diameter is a big determiner in thrust.=20 =20 I would like more pictures of Dons intake and exhaust! =20 Bill B =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Al Gietzen Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 3:05 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 1. When I read your stats in your first paragraph, the first thought = that comes to mind is that there is too much prop. =20 =20 Ditto. =20 Al G ------=_NextPart_000_002B_01CACCF8.8FD64360 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mike,
Your a hard man, however I do agree = with both=20 the Mazdatrix and Powersport results and would expect their operating at = optimum=20 configuration and 100% VE.
 
The question in my mind will we all = achieve this in=20 our less than perfect installations - probably not.
 
I can't remember exactly but powersport = was running=20 two PP sizes, 38mm or 40mm early version and the later 44mm. I = believe Bill=20 Jepson is awaiting the results of a more recent = 44mm dyno run. That 210hp may be the old 44mm HP = numbers - can't=20 remember exactly. Then again it may be the smaller inlet as they were = running=20 6,000 for take-off RPM. A smaller PP will give greater inlet speeds = reflecting=20 in VE.
George ( down under)
Sorry, not buying it Bill. If you are going = to quote=20 speeds here, quote speeds, not calculated speeds based on so many = variables=20 that the end result is meaningless. That sounds like something we'd = see on the=20 other list, not here. As far as I know, Don's best reported speed is = 174 IAS=20 (and IAS is not all that meaningful either). Based on performance = that=20 Don has actually reported his performance is roughly equivalent = to mine=20 (and I'm both prop and gearing limited). His performance may have = improved since he reported those numbers. In any case I'd prefer = to stick=20 to facts.
 
Speaking of the other list, Paul has = video of a=20 PP Renesis on a dyno  at Mazdatrix cranking out near 250HP = @7500RPM. And=20 he had the dyno sheet to prove it. Powersport claimed 210HP at 2700 = prop RPM=20 (their reduction ratio was around 2.2; roughly 6000 engine RPM). = I=20 believe they also had dyno data to prove it. I'm anxious to hear how = Mark=20 Stietle's PP 20B performs.
 
Mike Wills

From: Bill Bradburry
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 6:25 AM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning

Mike,

Don didn=92t report speed.  I took his = pitch and=20 rpm and figured it.  That speed at cruise is what he would get = with no=20 slippage or =93lift=94 from the prop.  Most of the folks with the = Catto are=20 actually getting higher speeds than would be calculated which = indicates that=20 the prop is producing =93lift=94, not = slippage. 

 

But his engine rpm with that big prop are = higher than=20 any I have seen.  With the rotary, rpm =3D horsepower.  If = you aint=20 making the rpm, you aint making the horsepower.  It doesn=92t = seem to=20 matter what you have done to the engine=85ported, PP, turbo, = supercharger. =20 If you look at the dyno charts that are all over the web, you will see = that=20 torque is pretty flat after about 4K, about 150 ft lbs.  The = horsepower=20 is around 150 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, and 200 at 7.5K.  You can = get more=20 horsepower than that, but only if you scream it up to 8K  or = 8.5K. =20 All the charts I have seen are within 10 horsepower of each other at = all=20 rpms.  The difference in total horsepower is always a higher max=20 rpm.

 

We all talk about wanting to cruise at 5800 = and make=20 200 horsepower=85it aint happening!  Not with the=20 rotary.

 

Bill B

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Mike Wills
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 = 1:17=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo = Planning=20

Bill,

 

I went back and looked = at Don's=20 previous post. Saw reference to climb performance, RPMs, and temps, = but no=20 speed numbers. Has he previously reported cruise speeds over 200? Last = post=20 from him that I saw with any speed numbers reported 174MPH IAS at=20 8000. If he's over 200 now, wow those are good=20 numbers!

 

Mike=20 Wills

 

From: Bill=20 Bradburry

Sent:=20 Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:15 PM

To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20

Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning =

 

Those are the best numbers I have seen with = anyone=20 with a Renesis so far.  In fact, I have not heard of numbers that = good on=20 any 13B.  Don is getting over 200 MPH with a cruise prop and = climbing at=20 over 1400 fpm with it.  The only way he is going to do better is = either=20 with an electric CS prop and/or turbo.  If he shaves the prop off = to say,=20 74=94, he will get a couple hundred more rpm, but will probably lose = in total=20 thrust.  Diameter is a big determiner in=20 thrust. 

 

I would like more pictures of Dons intake = and=20 exhaust!

 

Bill B

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Al Gietzen
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 = 3:05=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo = Planning=20

1. When I read your stats in your first = paragraph, the=20 first thought that

comes to mind is that there is too much = prop. =20

 

Ditto.

 

Al=20 G

------=_NextPart_000_002B_01CACCF8.8FD64360--