X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: "Charlie England" Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.9) with ESMTPS id 8567974 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 18:02:50 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.220.45; envelope-from=ceengland7@gmail.com Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ot11so45757997pab.1 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:02:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=GoOCAG5l0ZUJjETC1NzxrXNV7AcFDJh9xyZS45mhoKI=; b=jrka9aECOlVmEm7streR3dX/Ecbfs4bs4kPWopAOqQvW6Tp+dfx0hGp3adcVPtCKoX Wr6HtjFZHxpIghpbsMMmLVkCzchYXyRm+S19NEhn5hHDJhJ0fWgHe5N3peQqKiVp8TzG +W08ko34Zh7/BQsUUr55q/tbcklHQ3yucEUJcl0WqewBE1ZDVH9uhZyanen7CAYaw9Ju vj+Ns/4ia8W2jxkwR+GBjuZJZIcyO8nF4aZhMCjsZ9MTKwPbgyTswKW5fY+kCEFPsSIL UEgZQ7oIb+sm7YTJws3P0mJ2E3RwzH3WT/HHox3ppuNVAZU+h069EtDlxxrxvbhHwyaI lYzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=GoOCAG5l0ZUJjETC1NzxrXNV7AcFDJh9xyZS45mhoKI=; b=jRw0kGCE3SGeo42vVFW36c0yMVk4rlZd/P/9yn940y9mVaugHDKC0FD+CqWyshw8Jv C5qlQUOUrfVEd0Yir4CdmQ7jc9YlQKvePPoa3/S24/wv++Y1aSwh3440dheVSJoPZvp4 KxbFoWnL9agqtKAvf5kbg6/lJLzPBemZVyXfzPWPGsufp33hPnVyqCqSjdTPshR1FlYC bcu35Vjm12Vk3tEFxcYUqgDXzjobdV4MLDeJcRmfAyHpmxlqFg27S7u50osyU+EZ1jZx PePgnbNgp6/Fmc1Tsex9A9sBDrVtkP/v2WKOi6y5gNveV41v6pN3sc+gfFL90pdL27kE 3WGw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJvB1LkNPaqa9kv83zYEHWcXp8Ff6hXpUFk6PnwRg3z4c/3ws1w3oTo9vffOqisUg== X-Received: by 10.66.243.35 with SMTP id wv3mr35987264pac.93.1460412151669; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2602:306:25fa:b8e9:301a:cf1e:f6be:cd75? ([2602:306:25fa:b8e9:301a:cf1e:f6be:cd75]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id s197sm38342976pfs.62.2016.04.11.15.02.29 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake Styles and Data To: Rotary motors in aircraft References: Message-ID: <570C1F76.9080701@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:04:38 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010805000208080101050105" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010805000208080101050105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Len, I bow to your superior knowledge & experience. But when the Renesis first came on the market, one of the big rotary speed shops did everything they could with custom exhaust systems (headers) and IIRC, the most HP gain they got over the stock Renesis exhaust manifold was 7 HP. (The only custom exhaust header I see for the Renesis has a claimed increase of 4 HP. http://www.racingbeat.com/RX8/Exhaust-Headers/16133.html ) Their conclusion was that with the Renesis' zero intake/exhaust overlap, all that mattered on the exhaust side was keeping back pressure to a minimum. They concluded that the only 'tuning' available on the Renesis was on the intake side, since the exhaust couldn't contribute to increasing intake flow like it does on 'normal' engines with overlap. Do you disagree with this? (Remember, I'm only talking about the Renesis, with zero overlap.) Charlie On 4/11/2016 2:38 PM, Lehanover wrote: > For intake lengths, the ideal is the enemy of the good. There is only > one perfect length and diameter for each full throttle RPM. So a very > large number of lengths and diameters work very well for AC use. > Tracy's Race winning engine had rather short compact tube lengths and > outran everybody. My racer has 170 HP at 6,500 RPM and 250 HP at 9,600 > RPM from a 12A engine with 2292 CCs. This with a very large bridge > port. The 13Bs you are building are bigger with 2,606CCs. > The engines tune like a 2 cycle dirt bike. The exhaust system makes a > far bigger difference than does the intake design. My Drummond built > race engines us a stock intake manifold gasket. The intake runners are > polished but NOT enlarged. You want the highest possible intake flow > velocity at every RPM. The intake manifold to mount a Weber 48 IDF has > a plenum below each throat so the actual runner length is very short. > This in turn tunes a bit better at stupid high RPM but works well > enough to deliver good performance above 6,000 RPM. You would not have > to add much length beyond the stock lower manifold to be about perfect > for aircraft use. The HP is in the exhaust system. The side port > engines have fewer degrees of overlap than does a Pport (Massive > overlap). Renesis has no overlap at all. Smoother the idle for less > the overlap. > Lynn E. Hanover > Racing rotaries since 1980. > In a message dated 4/11/2016 12:38:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes: > > Actually on paper I’m still the CEO of the company but all the day > to day operations are handled by Laura since my retirement. She > has been a great business partner. > > Tracy > > Sent from Mail > for Windows 10 > > *From: *ARGOLDMAN > *Sent: *Monday, April 11, 2016 8:29 AM > *To: *Rotary motors in aircraft > *Subject: *[FlyRotary] Re: Intake Styles and Data > > Thanks for the link. > > Actually, The company is owned by Laura, Tracy's EX. (reminds me > of the license plate of a Mercedes, in my area," WAS HIS" > > Although they don't have aviation parts any more, they still stock > a complete line of Tracy's seals, rebuild kits etc. > > Rich > > In a message dated 4/10/2016 9:28:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes: > > Sorry for lack of detailed info; I was away from home & pecking at > my phone to reply. > > Wayback machine: > https://archive.org/web/ > > Tracy's old website was: > http://www.rotaryaviation.com/ > which no longer has aviation info on it (currently only car > performance parts under different ownership). > > = > --------------010805000208080101050105 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Len,

I bow to your superior knowledge & experience.

But when the Renesis first came on the market, one of the big rotary speed shops did everything they could with custom exhaust systems (headers) and IIRC, the most HP gain they got over the stock Renesis exhaust manifold was 7 HP. (The only custom exhaust header I see for the Renesis has a claimed increase of 4 HP.
http://www.racingbeat.com/RX8/Exhaust-Headers/16133.html  )

Their conclusion was that with the Renesis' zero intake/exhaust overlap, all that mattered on the exhaust side was keeping back pressure to a minimum. They concluded that the only 'tuning' available on the Renesis was on the intake side, since the exhaust couldn't contribute to increasing intake flow like it does on 'normal' engines with overlap. Do you disagree with this? (Remember, I'm only talking about the Renesis, with zero overlap.)

Charlie

On 4/11/2016 2:38 PM, Lehanover wrote:
For intake lengths, the ideal is the enemy of the good. There is only one perfect length and diameter for each full throttle RPM. So a very large number of lengths and diameters work very well for AC use. Tracy's Race winning engine had rather short compact tube lengths and outran everybody. My racer has 170 HP at 6,500 RPM and 250 HP at 9,600 RPM from a 12A engine with 2292 CCs. This with a very large bridge port. The 13Bs you are building are bigger with 2,606CCs.
 
The engines tune like a 2 cycle dirt bike. The exhaust system makes a far bigger difference than does the intake design. My Drummond built race engines us a stock intake manifold gasket. The intake runners are polished but NOT enlarged. You want the highest possible intake flow velocity at every RPM. The intake manifold to mount a Weber 48 IDF has a plenum below each throat so the actual runner length is very short. This in turn tunes a bit better at stupid high RPM but works well enough to deliver good performance above 6,000 RPM. You would not have to add much length beyond the stock lower manifold to be about perfect for aircraft use. The HP is in the exhaust system. The side port engines have fewer degrees of overlap than does a Pport (Massive overlap). Renesis has no overlap at all. Smoother the idle for less the overlap.
 
Lynn E. Hanover
Racing rotaries since 1980.     
 
In a message dated 4/11/2016 12:38:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:

Actually on paper I’m still the CEO of the company but all the day to day operations are handled by Laura since my retirement.  She has been a great business partner.

 

Tracy

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: ARGOLDMAN
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 8:29 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake Styles and Data

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the link.

 

Actually, The company is owned by Laura, Tracy's EX.  (reminds me of the license plate of a Mercedes, in my area," WAS HIS"

 

Although they don't have aviation parts any more, they still stock a complete line of Tracy's seals, rebuild kits etc.

 

Rich

 

In a message dated 4/10/2016 9:28:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:

Sorry for lack of detailed info; I was away from home & pecking at my phone to reply.

Wayback machine:
https://archive.org/web/

Tracy's old website was:
http://www.rotaryaviation.com/
which no longer has aviation info on it (currently only car performance parts under different ownership).

 

=

--------------010805000208080101050105--