X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=L4JfeKb8 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=S5ri1riXoQJRqm9cTeWySg==:117 a=x7bEGLp0ZPQA:10 a=Fee85h93u3AA:10 a=smKx5t2vBNcA:10 a=-ZWx6XDNE4MA:10 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=MCv1loKrAAAA:20 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=zukm5M5NnExBHsq4jWcA:9 a=7Zwj6sZBwVKJAoWSPKxL6X1jA+E=:19 a=z_kAVDhvZQPaUK9D:21 a=nPOaTrfPe-E26a2c:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=gvSQh4r-fQ0A:10 a=XBh2sy_UAAAA:20 a=yBNDyr_L1WRQXdaW:21 a=kFtiUqFC5QXy6yYp:21 a=YfT1xS9e7sx4dQIO:21 a=Urk15JJjZg1Xo0ryW_k8:22 a=grOzbf7U_OpcSX4AJOnl:22 From: "Accountlehanover lehanover@aol.com" Received: from sonic309-13.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com ([74.6.129.123] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.8) with ESMTP id 11755038 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:45:50 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=74.6.129.123; envelope-from=lehanover@aol.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aol.com; s=a2048; t=1539269115; bh=7KqTskDS53uf2GuQBRUAN6TOUQTm1Zrv76jo8a5YdI8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:From:Subject; b=GpCM55i0C/ep3w2I+8DvueVzFJ26s+vcVVzYeFV79xmN3pwSXafMM/ogkBrwSa2PpkPXuToClF2WKEPedQ9aYDnBEwYxUt6SlP5bKVI4+JI0JFTlZyCQPeGMLKrBTe5U93xNg+ywfn9R6icnNlG2Vi3G8GedgzvShMVy7aZOn/ogGGoVr1Nf+jp6gahqhB2kRMd+dKl/b98fcc9tzez0aBKXTQhyzWxfZLq+FYk67QZZEstOLgUqEODuyquQoQ43EqK5xOoKUfj6Q5nL1d+F/OomtrOsZZTCzYoVXs/ULrdOEe3mrzX7vcdl3s1OcjtVO8heBKczHT9AFu1M/86tgQ== X-YMail-OSG: nDHUE0gVM1nwc_ln105mnL5inq.FSFlz3kx.IlguGAYqvNeGLv9YJR9qbQN8w_7 Bil20oDlO0Q6TSmR4oq6TPEXY_AUokxRJDGxnFKHmS55uf03r8Ncpo779SUffKDNI.cRuDVNxqzs moz0S2ceG_vg.YmaWj.DoKwtHutgmDiYxQbAXDa1p75MyO.WoFV3y_wDNawYgM1HfCUAg5jkXgvv KNBq3yWt_ldT4uV0d_ecB0OmlFHVBItU5DfHfSPEjI5VzyY7ekiyf58tLhq4LOaKnXl.aMiTRoJ0 jdxqJ27kPp2pKak5H9TPFH4eNhG7YMGdB.Hw7tyLqMkAfXExmyT0uiHK6sP7fY9b29zzwzoATV4N OL.KcOCdqjfhN2Ix7Swj9ePMTuHNBTBZxBLXe56NphZn3f.UWEaDF6_e.wH.qHwdA8HdKmrsf4ei 6kUPLfsUy0U7oYa19zKBWyljW7r9rx0L80r7R_WUKIArzIbIVWQaklRKDU.O5vOdm3TbKt404uve _bJZ4SK4Ni0rFzzFJQ4l78bFn.gHy4aWr.dN0l1Xpfi0bX8llsBnJEFPzw4dXWgWZ3dxy46GDf4V tGR_IvhtwWOvMAu0RRXQNsBen9UH7omaRu9fvcusSHYFe3.m.qi096hOPR5AVJOqQuEok3Bjmu8K rYwTeQJHVM1CJm9r9uTevfe1hrT8P9_ERV04XIlguOKkURfiLz2rqTDZrf5fYB0yCqhRWLFU3ESl U6g_cS_cB0jouSIBz2Y.ymYHH87n8tCmO6xTAdXmyhkn9Rm34_4GSHe1rCIh2N3IpcAX0y9rSOu4 GOuONNoC8pVqhjzQqwWe4etxRv3PSryEAGeoYR6UwkCbpk5obajNORWA_NguZ1dB3JjWqTutpn1K FaO2zwuxhiVTq7r5aGJFPNstrkXDkmGru7I2tJzDv5wE26TQmbWS9uINWFG8cNA08UbQbcMAvZB3 3LL7Udt5dSmatAjyzuv7RpSrG44x9tZXOfgTvNt2H4K91I7Gf70ptxKUFtq6Wv9DADvwafw-- Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic309.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:45:15 +0000 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:45:11 +0000 (UTC) To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message-ID: <410500201.8254596.1539269111446@mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 2 pass or not 2 pass... oil cooler? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_8254595_367375959.1539269111443" References: <410500201.8254596.1539269111446.ref@mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.12512 aolloki Apache-HttpClient/4.5 (Java/1.8.0_144) Content-Length: 26336 ------=_Part_8254595_367375959.1539269111443 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The baffle groove need not be deeper than 1/4" down the sides of the end ta= nk. Wire brush off the color on the tank. Press in the 1/8" baffle. It shou= ld fit snugly in the tank. Press the baffle firmly into the sealant between= two rows of tubes. Lay wet towels around the weld area about an inch away = from the weld. The baffle should be about 1/8" taller than the tank. Weld j= ust a bit and let it cool to the touch. This to avoid upsetting the sealant= . Small leaks around baffle may happen but will not affect performance.=C2= =A0Baffle must be a weldable alloy. Easy and quick............Lynn E. Hanov= er=C2=A0 In a message dated 10/8/2018 5:05:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, flyrotary@la= ncaironline.net writes: =C2=A0 Thanks for the quick responses, unfortunately I had a busy week and = had to put flying stuff on hold until now so I still haven't moved on this.= Tracy; I hear you and the thing is that a 2-pass would make for a much bett= er hose routing. It would shorten it and get rid of a 180 degree AN fitting= . That would save a little weight and resistance and just make for a cleane= r install. After cutting open my Mazda cooler I feel certain that this one = will have more than enough flow capacity even as a 2-pass. I just ordered 2= Arduino barometric pressure & temperature sensors as it should be easy eno= ugh to add them to the data-logger and then I can get a better idea of pres= sures across my coolers.=C2=A0 Ernest; I just ordered a wireless inspection= camera to try to get a good look at air flows to test whether you and Trac= y are in agreement ... or not :-)Lynn; So one of my biggest concerns with w= elding in a plate to convert to a 2-pass is the inability to weld all 4 sid= es of the plate with the plate edge inside the cooler against the tube plat= e being inaccessible. I can make it fit tight but it would still be suscept= ible to an insignificant amount of oil leaking by and bypassing the tubes, = if I do it right. If. Nobody, yourself included, mentioned this as a concer= n, so I'm going to proceed with this.=C2=A0 Steve; That is some really good= data. While there are certainly some differences in our installs it is sti= ll great to compare to. I see you have the RD1C so are climbing at 6800rpm.= I have the RD1B and so only run at about 5600 during climb but with about = 4psi of boost, climbing at ~95kts IAS at ~950fpm with 2 of us onboard, full= fuel. (well full main tanks, not aux.) =C2=A0 Most of my flying has been in the circuit as I'm working on that dar= n tailwheel thing, so my temps are really in a cycle up around a 110C for c= oolant and 110 for oil, then both dropping a little on the downwind and dro= pping right off on final, repeat. I have used my data-logger in it's rudime= ntary proto-type form to collect raw data while flying, and it works well, = so now I need to apply some correction math to the data input to give me mo= re meaning full data, so I can report hard numbers.=C2=A0Steve, I assume fr= om the pic that you have the cooler perpendicular to the airflow, which wou= ld account for much better performance. I had to tilt mine at a 30 degree a= ngle in order to fit it under the oil pan. Did you have to modify your cowl= to fit it in there? Id like to see a pic of your cowl with inlet. Todd Bartrim.....=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 add to cart....=C2=A0 =C2=A0too easy.= ....=C2=A0 =C2=A0 this is killing me.... On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 5:56 PM Steven W. Boese SBoese@uwyo.edu wrote: Todd, =C2=A0 This morning I made a short flight designed to challenge my cooling systems= as opposed to the way I normally operate.=C2=A0 The field elevation here i= s 7280 ft.=C2=A0 The conditions and results are listed in case they may be = of interest: =C2=A0 Climb from density altitude 9400' to 11600' OAT decreased from 21 to 14 deg C MAP decreased from 22.1 to 20.4 inches Hg Fuel flow decreased from 13.2 to 12.4 gal/hr RPM was 6800 IAS was 70 Kt TAS was 80 Kt Coolant was thermostatically controlled and 89 deg C The air pressure difference across the oil cooler core was 2.5 inches H2O Heat rejected by the coolant and oil cooling systems was 68% by coolant and= 32% by oil. =C2=A0 The following temperatures were stabilized at the end of the climb: Oil cooler oil inlet temperature was 114 deg C Oil cooler outlet temperature was 85 deg C Oil inlet side air exiting the core was 78 deg C Oil outlet side air exiting the core was 72 deg C =C2=A0 The oil cooler was a single pass DB30618. =C2=A0 I don't think I have observed an indication that the oil side of the oil co= oler is limiting when there is sufficient air flow through the core.=C2=A0 = As a result, it may be unlikely that converting the cooler to double pass w= ould improve its performance very much. =C2=A0 If you changed from a stock = Mazda cooler to the DB30618, you now have about twice the oil flow rate thr= ough the cooler.=C2=A0 If the temperature of the oil coming out of the cool= er is about the same as you had from the Mazda cooler, the temperature diff= erence of the oil across the cooler is now about half of what it was origin= ally.=C2=A0 In other words, about the same amount of heat is being removed = by the oil but the temperature of the oil in the sump is significantly less= .=C2=A0 Do you measure the oil cooler inlet and outlet oil temperatures? =C2=A0 I do not have an oil cooler outlet air duct.=C2=A0 Under almost all cruise = conditions, I restrict the air flow through the cooler by partially or full= y closing a shutter on the air outlet side of the cooler in order to get oi= l temperatures out of the cooler above 71 degrees C.=C2=A0 The shutter does= not close off all the core area due to interference with the engine mount. =C2=A0 I cannot produce as much power as you can due to the altitude here and my n= ormally aspirated engine.=C2=A0 However as altitude decreases the cooling c= apacity of the air increases by the same amount as the increase in power.= =C2=A0 So I have not observed a change in operating temperatures as a resul= t of changing altitude. =C2=A0 For what it is worth. =C2=A0 Steve Boese RV6A, 1986 13B NA, EC2, RD1C, MT electric CS prop =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft on behalf of = Todd Bartrim bartrim@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 1:55:57 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] 2 pass or not 2 pass... oil cooler? Hey Rotorheads;=C2=A0 =C2=A0This summer I bought the Fluidyne DB30618 but i= t is only a single pass. I recently inquired about them with Summit Racing = and they say they will provide a 2-pass as a custom order. The stock oil co= oler is a 2-pass but much more restrictive. The single pass added a longer = hose with a 180 swept fitting to make it work.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I'm seeing highe= r temps than I'd like to despite my improved duct work. Actually inlet duct= was improved, but outlet duct is new as I didn't have one before and I do = wonder if the outlet duct is restrictive but I'm limited with space and old= nose gear mount being in the way (as much as I'd like to remove the nose w= heel mount it is integral to the engine mount, so I'm stuck with it), so I = wonder if it would be better to remove the exit duct completely and just le= ave the oil cooler exit air un-ducted?=C2=A0 =C2=A0But to the main question= for tonight, I'm thinking about converting my cooler to a 2-pass. I have b= een experiencing higher oil temps than expected at around 110C and consider= ing the OAT has dropped considerably, I would like to reduce these somewhat= . I suspect that the flow is not going through the entire cooler evenly wit= h a majority of flow channeling through only a few of the tubes as it is no= t really any different than the temps it used to see with the Mazda cooler.= The larger size and more efficient design should produce better cooling if= oil was flowing evenly through all tubes and spending a longer time in the= cooler.=C2=A0 So I'm thinking it should be simple enough to convert to a 2= -pass cooler which should ensure a better distribution of flow through all = the tubes. But is it really so simple?? See pic athttps://photos.app.goo.gl= /TrU99jXjftz4X8h37It would seem a simple matter to zip-cut a slot where the= red line is, slide in a baffle plate and weld it up, re-sealing the end ta= nk, drill a hole and weld in the new AN10 fitting and at the other end, zip= off the old AN12 fitting and weld it up. This would also simplify plumbing= , as the oil in line would be shorter and go straight in with no 180 bend.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0But the thing is I can only weld on 3 sides of the baffle plat= e that I would install. I can ensure that it is tightly seated against the = tube end plate between the tube but it wouldn't be a sealed junction. Do it= right and an insignificant amount of oil may bypass there and not go throu= gh the tubes. Do it wrong and it could be a significant amount with a drast= ic reduction in cooling.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Obviously I've already removed the coo= ler and brought it home with the intent to do this mod, but now I'm second = guessing myself. I've considered that if Summit Racing is modifying these a= s a custom order then they likely are doing just what I plan to do. Otherwi= se it would have to be done during manufacture by Fluidyne.=C2=A0 =C2=A0It = seems simple, but I lost sleep last night considering all the various issue= s. Still didn't do it today, so I figured I'd pose the question to the grou= p and go hunting with my kid tomorrow while I wait for the opinions to arri= ve. =C2=A0 =C2=A0On another topic, during a take-off roll the other day, the di= aphragm in my old stock wastegate actuator blew. I didn't catch it with the= throttle until I hit 16.5 psi of boost. No damage but I gotta say that's a= fun way to get off the ground in a hurry! I usually limit myself to 6 psi = of boost as that was the spring pressure. I do have an electronic controlle= r (TurboSmart) which allows me to have higher pressures above the spring pr= essure, but that is intended for high altitude and mountain flying. =C2=A0 I've ordered a new adjustable piston type of actuator that comes wit= h a selection of 6 springs. I intend to use the 3 psi spring as I usually u= se the boost very conservatively and the TurboSmart controller can give me = more if I need it for short mountain strips.Anyways, I look forward to your= opinions on the oil cooler. Todd Bartrim=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0.......=C2=A0 20.6 hours on new RV9 version= 2.0.....=C2=A0 I had to cash in beer cans for gas money....C-FSTBRV9 13Btu= rbo-- Homepage:=C2=A0 http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub:=C2=A0 =C2=A0http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyr= otary/List.html ------=_Part_8254595_367375959.1539269111443 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The baffle groove need not be deeper than 1/4" down the sides of the end tank. Wire brush off the color on the tank. Press in the 1/8" baffle. It should fit snugly in the tank. Press the baffle firmly into the sealant between two rows of tubes. Lay wet towels around the weld area about an inch away from the weld. The baffle should be about 1/8" taller than the tank. Weld just a bit and let it cool to the touch. This to avoid upsetting the sealant. Small leaks around baffle may happen but will not affect performance. Baffle must be a weldable alloy. Easy and quick............Lynn E. Hanover 

In a message dated 10/8/2018 5:05:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:

  Thanks for the quick responses, unfortunately I had a busy week and had to put flying stuff on hold until now so I still haven't moved on this.
Tracy; I hear you and the thing is that a 2-pass would make for a much better hose routing. It would shorten it and get rid of a 180 degree AN fitting. That would save a little weight and resistance and just make for a cleaner install. After cutting open my Mazda cooler I feel certain that this one will have more than enough flow capacity even as a 2-pass. I just ordered 2 Arduino barometric pressure & temperature sensors as it should be easy enough to add them to the data-logger and then I can get a better idea of pressures across my coolers.
  Ernest; I just ordered a wireless inspection camera to try to get a good look at air flows to test whether you and Tracy are in agreement ... or not :-)
Lynn; So one of my biggest concerns with welding in a plate to convert to a 2-pass is the inability to weld all 4 sides of the plate with the plate edge inside the cooler against the tube plate being inaccessible. I can make it fit tight but it would still be susceptible to an insignificant amount of oil leaking by and bypassing the tubes, if I do it right. If. Nobody, yourself included, mentioned this as a concern, so I'm going to proceed with this.
  Steve; That is some really good data. While there are certainly some differences in our installs it is still great to compare to. I see you have the RD1C so are climbing at 6800rpm. I have the RD1B and so only run at about 5600 during climb but with about 4psi of boost, climbing at ~95kts IAS at ~950fpm with 2 of us onboard, full fuel. (well full main tanks, not aux.)
  Most of my flying has been in the circuit as I'm working on that darn tailwheel thing, so my temps are really in a cycle up around a 110C for coolant and 110 for oil, then both dropping a little on the downwind and dropping right off on final, repeat. I have used my data-logger in it's rudimentary proto-type form to collect raw data while flying, and it works well, so now I need to apply some correction math to the data input to give me more meaning full data, so I can report hard numbers.
 Steve, I assume from the pic that you have the cooler perpendicular to the airflow, which would account for much better performance. I had to tilt mine at a 30 degree angle in order to fit it under the oil pan. Did you have to modify your cowl to fit it in there? Id like to see a pic of your cowl with inlet.

Todd Bartrim.....      add to cart....   too easy.....    this is killing me....

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 5:56 PM Steven W. Boese SBoese@uwyo.edu <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

Todd,

 

This morning I made a short flight designed to challenge my cooling systems as opposed to the way I normally operate.  The field elevation here is 7280 ft.  The conditions and results are listed in case they may be of interest:

 

Climb from density altitude 9400' to 11600'

OAT decreased from 21 to 14 deg C

MAP decreased from 22.1 to 20.4 inches Hg

Fuel flow decreased from 13.2 to 12.4 gal/hr

RPM was 6800

IAS was 70 Kt

TAS was 80 Kt

Coolant was thermostatically controlled and 89 deg C

The air pressure difference across the oil cooler core was 2.5 inches H2O

Heat rejected by the coolant and oil cooling systems was 68% by coolant and 32% by oil.

 

The following temperatures were stabilized at the end of the climb:

Oil cooler oil inlet temperature was 114 deg C

Oil cooler outlet temperature was 85 deg C

Oil inlet side air exiting the core was 78 deg C

Oil outlet side air exiting the core was 72 deg C

 

The oil cooler was a single pass DB30618.

 

I don't think I have observed an indication that the oil side of the oil cooler is limiting when there is sufficient air flow through the core.  As a result, it may be unlikely that converting the cooler to double pass would improve its performance very much.   If you changed from a stock Mazda cooler to the DB30618, you now have about twice the oil flow rate through the cooler.  If the temperature of the oil coming out of the cooler is about the same as you had from the Mazda cooler, the temperature difference of the oil across the cooler is now about half of what it was originally.  In other words, about the same amount of heat is being removed by the oil but the temperature of the oil in the sump is significantly less.  Do you measure the oil cooler inlet and outlet oil temperatures?

 

I do not have an oil cooler outlet air duct.  Under almost all cruise conditions, I restrict the air flow through the cooler by partially or fully closing a shutter on the air outlet side of the cooler in order to get oil temperatures out of the cooler above 71 degrees C.  The shutter does not close off all the core area due to interference with the engine mount.

 

I cannot produce as much power as you can due to the altitude here and my normally aspirated engine.  However as altitude decreases the cooling capacity of the air increases by the same amount as the increase in power.  So I have not observed a change in operating temperatures as a result of changing altitude.

 

For what it is worth.

 

Steve Boese

RV6A, 1986 13B NA, EC2, RD1C, MT electric CS prop

 

 

 

     

From: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> on behalf of Todd Bartrim bartrim@gmail.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 1:55:57 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] 2 pass or not 2 pass... oil cooler?

Hey Rotorheads;
   This summer I bought the Fluidyne DB30618 but it is only a single pass. I recently inquired about them with Summit Racing and they say they will provide a 2-pass as a custom order. The stock oil cooler is a 2-pass but much more restrictive. The single pass added a longer hose with a 180 swept fitting to make it work.
   I'm seeing higher temps than I'd like to despite my improved duct work. Actually inlet duct was improved, but outlet duct is new as I didn't have one before and I do wonder if the outlet duct is restrictive but I'm limited with space and old nose gear mount being in the way (as much as I'd like to remove the nose wheel mount it is integral to the engine mount, so I'm stuck with it), so I wonder if it would be better to remove the exit duct completely and just leave the oil cooler exit air un-ducted?
   But to the main question for tonight, I'm thinking about converting my cooler to a 2-pass. I have been experiencing higher oil temps than expected at around 110C and considering the OAT has dropped considerably, I would like to reduce these somewhat. I suspect that the flow is not going through the entire cooler evenly with a majority of flow channeling through only a few of the tubes as it is not really any different than the temps it used to see with the Mazda cooler. The larger size and more efficient design should produce better cooling if oil was flowing evenly through all tubes and spending a longer time in the cooler.
  So I'm thinking it should be simple enough to convert to a 2-pass cooler which should ensure a better distribution of flow through all the tubes. But is it really so simple?? See pic at
It would seem a simple matter to zip-cut a slot where the red line is, slide in a baffle plate and weld it up, re-sealing the end tank, drill a hole and weld in the new AN10 fitting and at the other end, zip off the old AN12 fitting and weld it up. This would also simplify plumbing, as the oil in line would be shorter and go straight in with no 180 bend.
   But the thing is I can only weld on 3 sides of the baffle plate that I would install. I can ensure that it is tightly seated against the tube end plate between the tube but it wouldn't be a sealed junction. Do it right and an insignificant amount of oil may bypass there and not go through the tubes. Do it wrong and it could be a significant amount with a drastic reduction in cooling.
   Obviously I've already removed the cooler and brought it home with the intent to do this mod, but now I'm second guessing myself. I've considered that if Summit Racing is modifying these as a custom order then they likely are doing just what I plan to do. Otherwise it would have to be done during manufacture by Fluidyne.
   It seems simple, but I lost sleep last night considering all the various issues. Still didn't do it today, so I figured I'd pose the question to the group and go hunting with my kid tomorrow while I wait for the opinions to arrive.

   On another topic, during a take-off roll the other day, the diaphragm in my old stock wastegate actuator blew. I didn't catch it with the throttle until I hit 16.5 psi of boost. No damage but I gotta say that's a fun way to get off the ground in a hurry! I usually limit myself to 6 psi of boost as that was the spring pressure. I do have an electronic controller (TurboSmart) which allows me to have higher pressures above the spring pressure, but that is intended for high altitude and mountain flying.
  I've ordered a new adjustable piston type of actuator that comes with a selection of 6 springs. I intend to use the 3 psi spring as I usually use the boost very conservatively and the TurboSmart controller can give me more if I need it for short mountain strips.
Anyways, I look forward to your opinions on the oil cooler.

Todd Bartrim     .......  20.6 hours on new RV9 version 2.0.....  I had to cash in beer cans for gas money....
C-FSTB
RV9 13Bturbo
--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_Part_8254595_367375959.1539269111443--