Return-Path: Received: from out014.verizon.net ([206.46.170.46] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 552436 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:06:59 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.170.46; envelope-from=finn.lassen@verizon.net Received: from verizon.net ([4.12.145.173]) by out014.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20041201150627.LSVB1339.out014.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:06:27 -0600 Message-ID: <41ADDDF2.7000908@verizon.net> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 10:06:26 -0500 From: Finn Lassen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax; PROMO) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: New Muffler Design References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070305070806060903000407" X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out014.verizon.net from [4.12.145.173] at Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:06:27 -0600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070305070806060903000407 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks Ed. The reason I asked is I'm (again) looking at changing to fuel injection and tuned intake. I was tempted by Tracy's simple Renesis setup, but after a discussion it looks like it's not going to work well on the 6-port NA without some grinding in the end housings, requiring an engine rebuild. So I'm again leaning towards copying Tracy's 13B wrapover, and of course would like your confirmed updated data on best length. But, I'm not in a hurry. As usual, I'd rather be flying. Finn Ed Anderson wrote: >Yes and No, Finn > >My principal objective was simply to get the mechanics of the variable >intake length down and working which I did. I made a number of compromises >including using my first home made lower intake manifold (for convince - had >it laying around) which I knew had poor flow characteristics (one of the >reasons I took it off in the first place). Then to make it even easier I >used an old Webber upper manifold which required I merge the primary and >secondary intakes. But, I think where I really went wrong was having a >tight 180 deg bend in the intake right where the throttle body was >positioned. The pulses do not like sharp turns. > >In any case, I did vary the manifold in flight but to my surprise it did not >cause the rpm to vary even 50 rpm - I would have expected some change even >if due to "organ pipe" tuning effect. But, Nada! which was a little strange >in itself. > >I then got involved in converting to the 2.85 and monster prop, so I took >the variable intake off and reverted to the manifold that had proven to give >me the best power. However, I will revisit the variable intake - but this >time I will not merge the primary and secondary nor require the FAW to >follow a tight 180 deg turn. The mechanics of running 4 tubes up and down >is a bit more involved that just running two - so need to do some head >scratching to come up with a lightweight and reliable mechanism. > >Just too many projects and not enough time/$$ to do them all {:>) > >Ed Anderson > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Finn Lassen" >To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:55 PM >Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: New Muffler Design > > > > >>Hi Ed, >> >>I just realized that you started a new project. Did you ever finish the >>variable intake length testing? >> >>Finn >> >> >> >> >>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html >>>> >>>> > > > > > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html >>> >>> > > > --------------070305070806060903000407 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks Ed.

The reason I asked is I'm (again) looking at changing to fuel injection and tuned intake. I was tempted by Tracy's simple Renesis setup, but after a discussion it looks like it's not going to work well on the 6-port NA without some grinding in the end housings, requiring an engine rebuild. So I'm again leaning towards copying Tracy's 13B wrapover, and of course would like your confirmed updated data on best length.

But, I'm not in a hurry. As usual, I'd rather be flying.

Finn

Ed Anderson wrote:
Yes and No, Finn

My principal objective was simply to get the mechanics of the variable
intake length down and working which I did.  I made a number of compromises
including using my first home made lower intake manifold (for convince - had
it laying around) which I knew had poor flow characteristics (one of the
reasons I took it off in the first place).  Then to make it even easier I
used an old Webber upper manifold which required I merge the primary and
secondary intakes.  But, I think where I really went wrong was having a
tight  180 deg bend in the intake right where the throttle body was
positioned.  The pulses do not like sharp turns.

In any case, I did vary the manifold in flight but to my surprise it did not
cause the rpm to vary even 50 rpm - I would have expected some change even
if due to "organ pipe" tuning effect. But, Nada!  which was a little strange
in itself.

I then got involved in converting to the 2.85 and monster prop, so I took
the variable intake off and reverted to the manifold that had proven to give
me the best power.  However, I will revisit the variable intake - but this
time I will not merge the primary and secondary nor require the FAW to
follow a tight 180 deg turn.  The mechanics of running 4 tubes up and down
is a bit more involved that just running two - so need to do some head
scratching to come up with a lightweight and reliable mechanism.

Just too many projects and not enough time/$$ to do them all {:>)

Ed Anderson


----- Original Message -----
From: "Finn Lassen" <finn.lassen@verizon.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:55 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: New Muffler Design


  
Hi Ed,

I just realized that you started a new project. Did you ever finish the
variable intake length testing?

Finn


    
 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
 Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
        



  
 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
 Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
--------------070305070806060903000407--