Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.218.94.135; envelope-from=tomtugan@yahoo.com
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  b=2xww3TpiMlddJ8vZ3eShCT+NDjlqJvhQSKOif3Vhp+gxriJNbO53/Z6fAf1/1xFzaBuNFGU6V4Hp3JTuHe90S49w6Cw+uJjSj6YMrF6VB+hVOC1jtQV5lPpKmpjjm5GnZBhYf7irn6a+y1xbGXG3jMCBIQKHBmpsjKp5LgevguE=  ;
Message-ID: <20050112170620.94919.qmail@web41528.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:06:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom <tomtugan@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: props again
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-604606@logan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Based on what I've read now,  it doesn't sound like the prop or fuel.  You've
already indicated that you could give it too little and too much fuel in the
mixture and that didn't help.  Something else is limiting the power. 

Tom (from debugging other things)


--- Jim Sower <canarder@frontiernet.net> wrote:

> <... 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
> >>>      
> >>>
> 


__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! 
http://my.yahoo.com