Return-Path: Received: from relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net ([66.133.131.36] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP id 604581 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:34:04 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.133.131.36; envelope-from=canarder@frontiernet.net Received: from filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.131.176]) by relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC7A19255B for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net ([66.133.131.36]) by filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.131.176]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 05310-10-11 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (70-97-232-197.dsl2.cok.tn.frontiernet.net [70.97.232.197]) by relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9A5192554 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:30:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <41E5421A.6060408@frontiernet.net> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:28:26 -0600 From: Jim Sower User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: props again References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000702000809060003080802" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0502-2, 01/11/2005), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20040701 (2.0) at filter01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000702000809060003080802 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <... The original prop was a 64 x 78. I replaced it with a 62 x 72, same manufacturer. Should take less power to swing it, which one would expect more rpm's? Paul Conner ...> That pretty much HAS to turn faster. If you have a friend with same prop hub as yours, have him try both props and see (as a percentage) how much more rpm he can get on the smaller prop. If he gets 15% or 20% more rpm with the smaller prop and you don't, you're back to trouble shooting and tuning your fuel control. My best guess ... Jim S. Paul wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] > *On Behalf Of *Russell Duffy > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 11, 2005 10:29 PM > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: props again > > > > Well, I installed my new prop today, hoping for higher rpm's. I > mistakenly assumed that by installing a smaller diameter prop with > less pitch, I would gain engine rpm's. Wrong. I am still stuck at > 4800 rpm's, big prop or little prop. > > > > How different are the props supposed to be? > > > > Rusty (where's my pizza) > > > > The original prop was a 64 x 78. I replaced it with a 62 x 72, same > manufacturer. Should take less power to swing it, which one would > expect more rpm's? Paul Conner > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005 > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html >>> >>> --------------000702000809060003080802 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <... The original prop was a 64 x 78. I replaced it with a 62 x 72, same manufacturer. Should take less power to swing it, which one would expect more rpm’s? Paul Conner ...>

That pretty much HAS to turn faster. If you have a friend with same prop hub as yours, have him try both props and see (as a percentage) how much more rpm he can get on the smaller prop. If he gets 15% or 20% more rpm with the smaller prop and you don't, you're back to trouble shooting and tuning your fuel control.

My best guess ... Jim S.

Paul wrote:

Message

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Russell Duffy
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 10:29 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: props again

Well, I installed my new prop today, hoping for higher rpm’s. I mistakenly assumed that by installing a smaller diameter prop with less pitch, I would gain engine rpm’s. Wrong. I am still stuck at 4800 rpm’s, big prop or little prop.

How different are the props supposed to be?

Rusty (where's my pizza)

The original prop was a 64 x 78. I replaced it with a 62 x 72, same manufacturer. Should take less power to swing it, which one would expect more rpm’s? Paul Conner
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/2005
  
  
 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
 Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
      

--------------000702000809060003080802--