Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.64; envelope-from=pmrobert@bellsouth.net
From: <pmrobert@bellsouth.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Engine run
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:12:45 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20040827151245.WGFT1721.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net>


> 
> From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net>
> Date: 2004/08/27 Fri AM 09:47:30 EDT
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Engine run
> 
>
> I'm with Dave on this one.  You want the smoothest MAP source possible, and
> that will mean connecting all 3 ports, or perhaps just finding the one that
> works best.  I'm still working on this too.  On my latest intake, controller
> A would run fine (using a port on one of the TWM barrels), but controller B
> wouldn't run below about 2000 rpm (using the other port on the TWM).  I
> connected the two ports with a T, and not both idle just the same, which may
> not be as smooth as A was before I joined the lines.  Eventually, I'll get
> around to tying both controllers to one TWM port at a time.  
>  
> Another odd thought I had was to possibly put a small vacuum reservoir in
> the MAP port line, for the purpose of smoothing out the pulses some.  
> 

A cheap fuel filter, translucent generic type, and a MIG jet in line with your MAP sensor will work wonders in smoothing the MAP reading. Basically a mechanical RC filter. I use this in my auto installation and wouldn't run without it!

     -Mike