X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.100] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.2) with ESMTP id 1320640 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 13:36:28 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.100; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-111-186.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.111.186]) by ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6SHZQiO025459 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 13:35:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <000701c6b26c$145d9fd0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Was (was "Test") Re: [FlyRotary] Subject Lines (was "Test") Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 13:34:28 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Ah, Steve, but see what you may be missing by just using the subject line {:>). Will try to do better. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Thomas" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Subject Lines (was "Test") > Would you guys please change the subject line of the message when the > topic changes substantially? I utilize the subject line to determine if > a complete read is required. The subject "Test" came from someone > testing their e-mail account and now encompasses turbo chargers, exhaust, > and carburation. > > Best Regards, > > Steve Thomas > ________________________________________________________________________ > > On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Ed Anderson wrote: > >> Atomization was indeed a benefit when using carburetors with "suck >> through" turbo systems. The spinning compressor wheel reportedly did >> give some measurable benefits in mileage (when not under boost) due to >> better atomization of fuel. When I turbo charged two Honda Civics back >> in 1976-78, I could tell a small increase in mileage. >> >> However, in our installations, with fuel injectors down stream of the >> spinning blades, I personally doubt there is any atomization benefit >> since all the compressor blades are churning - is air. >> >> Ed >> Ed Anderson >> Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered >> Matthews, NC >> eanderson@carolina.rr.com >> http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Brooks" >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 12:18 PM >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test >> >> >>> Ed, >>> The only other comment I could make in favor of the turbo, is that it's >>> suppose to provide increased fuel economy, even at low boost levels by >>> improving the atomization of the fuel charge. >>> >>> I'm not sure about how true this is, but that is what I read somewhere >>> along >>> the line. >>> >>> I've had my T04 for about a year and a half now, but decided not to >>> replace >>> it until I got it moved. For one, the stock turbo hasn't given me any >>> trouble, and it will require a fair amount of work to get it changed >>> over. >>> My turbo is the same identical turbo that Paul and Lou are running. >>> It's a >>> Garrett .96 A/r with an s-trim compressor. >>> >>> I'd like to have gone higher than the .96, but the exhaust side turbine >>> gets >>> really large if you go any bigger. Paul has had good luck so far with >>> their >>> turbo. >>> >>> I'm aware of the oil temperature problem. I had told him early on >>> about my >>> concerns when I first saw their set up. I told him about the problems >>> that >>> I had, and what it took to resolve it. They are now increasing the air >>> flow >>> to the cooler, and may go to 2 oil coolers depending on how their next >>> test >>> go. I'm sure hat they'll get it worked out. >>> I rode in their plane on a fast taxi, and it is amazing how much power >>> it >>> has. As I recalled it dyno'd at 580 HP at 10lbs of boost. Their >>> engine >>> sounds like it is revving 10,000 RPM's when it throttles up, even >>> though it >>> is only 4-5 K. I guess that I'm used to the way mine sounds, and they >>> have >>> that additional rotor adding to the exhaust note. >>> >>> I can't wait to hear it fly. It should be interesting to say the >>> least. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On >>> Behalf Of Ed Anderson >>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:47 AM >>> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test >>> >>> >>> Yep! I'm sitting here monitoring some remodeling contractors >>> converting our >>> garage to the wife's desires. But, tomorrow, I get to raise my hangar >>> door >>> frame!! Then I can put on the sheets and start configuring the >>> hydraulic >>> system that opens the doorl >>> >>> I'm afraid I agree with you Steve. The stock Mazda turbo simply was >>> not >>> designed for the operating stresses we are able to put on it. I >>> believe if >>> you use modest boost only for take off (short term) and not for cruise >>> speed >>> then it may last a decent amount of time, but that sort of defeats the >>> idea >>> of the turbo providing at least sea level NA type power for high >>> altitude >>> high speed cruise. >>> >>> I have two turbos sitting on my work bench - I've toyed with the idea >>> on and >>> off for years, but just couldn't convince myself that I needed one >>> since I >>> tend to cruise at lower airspeeds to keep the fuel burn and $$ down. >>> If I >>> needed some extra boost just for takeoff, I'd probably just go NO2. >>> But, if >>> I were to do a turbo, it would not be with the stock Mazda turbo but >>> would >>> use something like the TO4. >>> >>> Yes, I tend not to fly at all in the July August time frame - just too >>> hot >>> for me to enjoy. Of coursed, I could get up before the break of dawn >>> and >>> find some cooler air. But, I tend to do my tinkering during those >>> months >>> and fly starting September. >>> >>> Paul and Lou are working out some oil cooling issues before jumping >>> into >>> their test program in earnest. >>> >>> Ed >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Steve Brooks" >>> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:36 AM >>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test >>> >>> >>>> Hi Ed, >>>> Things are kind of quiet with Oshkosh going on. I have been following >>>> the >>>> thread on the exhaust issues with the mufflers. >>>> >>>> I still haven't decided whether to keep the turbo or not. I haven't >>>> had >>>> any >>>> trouble with mine, but I do believe that it is just a matter of time. >>>> I >>>> also am very careful about how hard I push it. >>>> >>>> I have all of the parts to switch to a T04 turbo, except for the >>>> exhaust >>>> pipe and heat shield. I think that I'd like to try it without the >>>> turbo >>>> first, just to see how much power I have, and how much difference it >>>> makes >>>> in the temps. The 30+ lbs savings in weight would also be a plus. I >>>> want >>>> to see what kind of result that Buly gets running without a muffler. >>>> Seems >>>> like it would be pretty loud, but I may be wrong. >>>> >>>> Whatever I do, I'll probably do after I get the plane moved up to NC. >>>> I >>>> have the hours flown off. I just need to fly it up here. August >>>> doesn't >>>> provide the best flying weather though, so I'll probably wait until >>>> September to make the move. >>>> >>>> Steve Brooks >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On >>>> Behalf Of Ed Anderson >>>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:03 AM >>>> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >>>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test >>>> >>>> >>>> It works >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Steve Brooks" >>>> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >>>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 9:58 AM >>>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Test >>>> >>>> >>>>> I just changed my email address for Fly Rotary over to my Gmail >>>>> account, >>>>> and >>>>> wanted to make sure that it is working. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>>>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >> >> >> >> -- >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >> > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >