X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.170] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.14) with ESMTP id 3681183 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:41:37 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.200.170; envelope-from=fluffysheap@gmail.com Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 25so846585wfc.25 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:41:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=9S+ZU8HDn7y9k5TKkTwxRfOmf0QdS3zvIjpHPqvbEIs=; b=U6HHSxTCXQfM8UMJCqDni+xwX9yYUnTmBxZWQnBrNYwnksfnsZf174in0xkBMWOl99 UMDVUylRkvSUCqck1CW56Omi6qQ1fpp29H/3SEqB9QO18wBWolZLU8zO6zZHBfR7BJSk g81DcFjlO6LZtp0dMhB3iX375KTcxbqknZTjM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=pmX2SqpMUcYo7qbjolelgnvyW7Ti7OuXjN0VLMqB6td6hS1r8yJOi1caNLeDq5dBkb R1xZkRbvQCwYSeq2Qk45QceCiYe73CS86efNySZ7wOOB/EN3shrA3sdBbSHKbSb2AZ+K /GXP2UktxjOBX1bmMf4DZUOVgg0k5TGCDhP/0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.213.5 with SMTP id l5mr1969109wfg.91.1244864462446; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:41:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:41:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Taildragger Power Requirements From: William Wilson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd50a6c13e037046c3298f0 --000e0cd50a6c13e037046c3298f0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The '89-'91 engine is an evolutionary step over the '87-'88 engine, but it's certainly better. The main change is the lighter, higher compression rotors. There are some other minor changes too that are good in the car but probably don't matter in a plane (oil metering pump, emissions gear, electronics). On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Rick Van Camp wrote: > All, > > I'm new here, been on AREN for a few years and was encouraged to join this > list by John Slade. Many thanks John it looks like there are many practical > owners and builders here. > > I have had numerous thoughts on which aircraft and rotary engine > configuration during the recent weeks. The complication that changes all of > this is my desire to see wilderness and teach my toddler aged son to > appreciate it properly. For me this translates into a need for a float > plane. > > Consider the Stinson 108-2 as a candidate aircraft. The power output that > works well in this aircraft is the 210 TCM IO-360 fuel injected 6-cylinder. > This gives me a baseline target which the 13B should readily be able to > achieve. The difficulty is I hear what I (subjectively) think is too much > mysticism regarding obtaining power levels out of the 13B. Am I missing > something? > > The other complication is I like what I read about the Turbo-II 13B from > 1989(?) to 1991. Maybe as early as 1987; I'm uncertain. I like this engine > package because it produces good power from the OEM and it features what > should be some useful components for the job. I really like the comments > I've read regarding the turbo charger reduces the engine noise level. > > Please advise. > > Rick > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > --000e0cd50a6c13e037046c3298f0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The '89-'91 engine is an evolutionary step over the '87-'88= engine, but it's certainly better.=A0 The main change is the lighter, = higher compression rotors.=A0 There are some other minor changes too that a= re good in the car but probably don't matter in a plane (oil metering p= ump, emissions gear, electronics).

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Rick Van Ca= mp <ravc@earthli= nk.net> wrote:
All,

I'm new here, been on AREN for a few years and was encouraged to join t= his list by John Slade. =A0Many thanks John it looks like there are many pr= actical owners and builders here.

I have had numerous thoughts on which aircraft and rotary engine configurat= ion during the recent weeks. =A0The complication that changes all of this i= s my desire to see wilderness and teach my toddler aged son to appreciate i= t properly. =A0For me this translates into a need for a float plane.

Consider the Stinson 108-2 as a candidate aircraft. =A0The power output tha= t works well in this aircraft is the 210 TCM IO-360 fuel injected 6-cylinde= r. =A0This gives me a baseline target which the 13B should readily be able = to achieve. =A0The difficulty is I hear what I (subjectively) think is too = much mysticism regarding obtaining power levels out of the 13B. =A0Am I mis= sing something?

The other complication is I like what I read about the Turbo-II 13B from 19= 89(?) to 1991. =A0Maybe as early as 1987; I'm uncertain. =A0I like this= engine package because it produces good power from the OEM and it features= what should be some useful components for the job. =A0I really like the co= mments I've read regarding the turbo charger reduces the engine noise l= evel.

Please advise.

Rick

--
Homepage: =A0http:/= /www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: =A0 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists= /flyrotary/List.html

--000e0cd50a6c13e037046c3298f0--