Return-Path: Received: from imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 368585 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:07:30 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net Received: from bellsouth.net ([209.215.60.224]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.08 201-253-122-130-108-20031117) with ESMTP id <20040817190700.ZFDR1786.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:07:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4122573D.1000500@bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:06:37 -0500 From: Charlie England User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] P-P Surprise References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard wrote: > In developing the intake system for the one-rotor, I got some > surprise. When I got to the point of running both ports, side and P-P, > on one carb each, I tried to coordinate the cup(close-up butterfly) > with the carbs, there was no impact from the cup at idle or anywhere > else up to 3500RPM. Starting the engine with the cup full open was > normal. Naturally, I removed the cup and the engine is just running > fine. Throttle response with the P-P carb alone is very smooth and > solid. Idle speed is now at 1500RPM with the mixture not optimized yet. > So much for the cup in my case only. > I what I observed here holds up, the combo port idea may be dead > making the one rotor a more simple and better engine. > This also reminded me of the NSU Wankel Spider, which did not have a > cup and was running very fine. > > Richard Sohn > N-2071U > unicorn@gdsys.net As the Laugh-In Nazi used to say,"Veeelly interesting." I've been asking people since long before I got booted off the other list if they knew of anyone who had run a PP with electronic injection instead of carbs to prove that it was the PP itself causing the idle problem & not bad mixture & mixture distribution due to the low flow rate & bad tuning issues of carbs at idle. (Top *that* for a run-on sentence.) I always got the answer that the problem was due to overlap between the adjacent chambers in each rotor but no one ever said that EI had been tried on a PP 2rotor. Ken Powell needs stop his world traveling & get his PP running so it can be proven whether it's overlap or bad induction causing bad idle. Charlie