Don,
Could we please have a little more info on how you restricted the lines and
what you used to make the accumulation chamber?  I would like to try
something like that to see if it helps my situation.

I am also not certain how to try and compare your static rpm results at 5000
ft with what I get at 55 ft or with Dennis' results at 1000 ft.  I know the
thinner air would make the prop turn easier and the engine to make less
power, but I don't know how that would equate in the total picture.
In other words, what static rpm would the same plane produce at 55, 1000,
and 5000 ft???

Bill B

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Don Wallker
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 1:31 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Flight data

I'm getting 6080 RPM static.  I could only get about 5800 or so, then
noticed that my Manifold pressure bounced around plus or minus about 1.5
inches.  Tracy changed out one of the sensors in the EC-2 that may or may
not have been a problem, but the big thing was to dampen out the pressure
going back to the EC-2.  It is almost rock solid at any Map now. I
restricted the lines way down for a couple of inches then it runs into an
accumulation chamber about 2 inches long filled with tightly rolled up
scubby green pad.  I think that the pulses messed with the brain of the EC-2
and it didn't know exactly where it was as pressures to the sensors were
many several times a second.  My field elevation is 5000 ft  with a Catto
76/88 with the C model PSRU and a stock Renesis.  
Also play with your mixture.  Try turning it a little leaner!
Hope this helps.

Don Walker
R113BR flying

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