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 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4363648 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 21:15:59 -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 4D605173602 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 09:15:22 +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 A44DABEC00A for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 09:15:21 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Peripheral Port 13B Rotary Engine Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 11:15:28 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01CB1069.E34A29D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100619-1, 06/19/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CB1069.E34A29D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bob, I'm not flying a P-port, however I'm building one. Expectations are between 115 and 125 hp for a single rotor, expect = double that with a 2 rotor at around 7,000- 7,500 rpm. P-port provide better breathing and therefore more power, the inlet and = manifold size is designed around the RPM required. Reliability of port = design has been questionable unless it's the integral Mazda housings, = However Bill Jepson ( Mechanical Engineer is in the process of designing = inlets of excellent reliability - read proven design). What else would you need to know - I wonder? George ( down under) =20 Is anyone flying with a Mazda 13B peripheral port engine? If so, how = is it working? Can you describe the advantages and disadvantages? =20 Thanks, =20 Bob Rogers ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CB1069.E34A29D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bob,
I'm not flying a P-port, however I'm = building=20 one.
Expectations are between 115 and 125 hp = for a=20 single rotor, expect double that with a 2 rotor at around 7,000- 7,500=20 rpm.
P-port provide better breathing = and therefore=20 more power, the inlet and manifold size is designed around the RPM = required.=20 Reliability of port design has been questionable unless it's the = integral Mazda=20 housings, However Bill Jepson ( Mechanical Engineer is in the process of = designing inlets of excellent reliability - read proven = design).
What else would you need to know - I=20 wonder?
George ( down under)

 

Is anyone = flying with=20 a Mazda 13B peripheral port engine? =20 If so, how is it working? =20 Can you describe the advantages and=20 disadvantages?

 

Thanks,

 

Bob=20 Rogers

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CB1069.E34A29D0--