Return-Path: <steve@tsisp.com>
Received: from mail.tsisp.com ([65.23.108.44] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b3)
  with ESMTP-TLS id 96074 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 29 May 2004 13:06:57 -0400
Received: from localhost
        by mail.tsisp.com (Technical Support Inc.) with SMTP id CQA74584
        for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>; Sat, 29 May 2004 13:06:26 -0400
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 13:06:26 -0400
From: Steve Brooks <steve@tsisp.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Engine comparison
Message-ID: <c562e3e85c54a931092a353fe3daa89f@tsisp.com>
X-Mailer: IceWarp Web Mail 5.2.7
X-Originating-IP: 24.136.229.128
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Den,
Yes, mine has the lower compression rotors.  

Steve Brooks

-----Original message-----
From: "Dean Head" banana@atlantic.net
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 12:40:11 -0400
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Subject: [FlyRotary] Engine comparison

>  Guys(John,Steve,Todd,Dave),
>  
>  It will be great to see how the different setups compare as more hours are
>  accumulated. Discussions on how much boost got me thinking. Steve, I believe
>  you told me you had a stock turbo engine so I would guess 8.5 rotors. John,
>  yours are 9 something if I remember. Dave/Todd I don't recall seeing in the
>  posts your compression ratios? This will be some great data!
>  
>  John,
>  
>  This is probably a dumb question but, did you wipe down the pipes to get any
>  oil off before putting the hose and clamp on? Just a thought on what could
>  be different in the setups. Was it the same joint that blew each time?
>  
>  Dean Head
>  
>  BKV FL
>  
>   
>  
>