X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net ([68.230.241.30] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 932244 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 04 May 2005 11:08:18 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.30; envelope-from=ALVentures@cox.net Received: from BigAl ([68.7.14.39]) by fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050504150733.JCED7275.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@BigAl> for ; Wed, 4 May 2005 11:07:33 -0400 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Static MAP readings? Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 08:07:45 -0700 Message-ID: <000501c550bb$06f7b290$6400a8c0@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C55080.5A98DA90" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C55080.5A98DA90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Static MAP readings? =20 Yes. As you may recall, I also run with the TWM TB, and I also see = lower MAP than the local atmospheric pressure. That is quite likely as it = should be, or if not; it doesn't matter. The MAP reading depends on where you measure it. =20 =20 Hi Al, Yes, I recall that we've had this conversation before :-) =20 I certainly agree that it matters where you measure the MAP, and it = would be nice if we were all measuring it in the same place for comparison. I'm thinking of trying to put a port at the intake flange, but I'm not sure = if I have room to drill and tap a hole there yet. I'm also not sure it will = give an accurate reading. Still, it won't give an apples to apples = comparison to anyone else. =20 =20 On the dyno at WOT at 5300 rpm with a local barometric pressure of = 29.5", the MAP reading was 27.5". At 6000 rpm, WOT, MAP had dropped to about 26.5", and it was putting out close to 85 hp/rotor (SAE corrected, which means actual measured of just over 80) with 9.0 rotors. At 7000 rpm the = MAP reading was 23.5" and the power was still climbing at 95 hp/rotor. =20 =20 Reading these numbers sounds like the definition of "restriction" to me. = If you've got 95 hp/rotor now, imagine what it could be with less = restriction. Yes, I agree it does, and I have worried about it also. But you don't = get velocity without restriction, or IOW, there is no such thing as "no restriction" before getting to the port. Perhaps the question is - Is anyone getting more than 85 hp/rotor at 6000 rpm, MEASURED, with = normally aspirated, untuned intake, stock side-port, with 9.0 compression, newly overhauled engine. If so; I'll start considering a lower restriction induction system. =20 Hoping this makes you feel better,=20 =20 I'm afraid not, just the opposite in fact, but thanks for trying :-) =20 Have you tried Zoloft? :-) =20 Al ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C55080.5A98DA90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Static MAP readings?

 

Yes.  As you may recall, I also run with the TWM TB, and I also see lower MAP = than the local atmospheric pressure.  That is quite likely as it should = be, or if not; it doesn’t matter.  The MAP reading depends on where = you measure it.   

 

Hi = Al,   Yes, I recall that we've had this conversation before :-)

 

I certainly agree = that it matters where you measure the MAP, and it would be nice if we were all measuring it in the same place for comparison.  I'm thinking = of trying to put a port at the intake flange, but I'm not sure if I have = room to drill and tap a hole there yet.  I'm also not sure it will give an accurate reading.  Still, it won't give an apples to apples = comparison to anyone else.     

 

On the dyno at WOT at 5300 rpm with a local barometric pressure of = 29.5”, the MAP reading was 27.5”.  At 6000 rpm, WOT, MAP had dropped = to about 26.5”, and it was putting out close to 85 hp/rotor (SAE = corrected, which means actual measured of just over 80) with 9.0 rotors.  At = 7000 rpm the MAP reading was 23.5” and the power was still climbing at 95 hp/rotor.   

 

Reading these = numbers sounds like the definition of "restriction" to = me.  If you've got 95 = hp/rotor now, imagine what it could be with less = restriction.  

Yes, I agree it does, and I have = worried about it also.  But you don’t get velocity without = restriction, or IOW, there is no such thing as “no restriction” before = getting to the port.  Perhaps the question is – Is anyone getting more = than 85 hp/rotor at 6000 rpm, MEASURED, with normally aspirated, untuned intake, = stock side-port, with 9.0 compression, newly overhauled engine.  If so; = I’ll start considering a lower restriction induction = system.

 

Hoping this makes you feel = better, 

 

I'm afraid not, = just the opposite in fact, but thanks for trying :-)

 

Have you tried Zoloft? = J

 

Al

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C55080.5A98DA90--