X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-m24.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.5] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTP id 974524 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 08 Feb 2006 08:48:51 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.5; envelope-from=Lehanover@aol.com Received: from Lehanover@aol.com by imo-m24.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r6.3.) id q.289.54bca77 (4426) for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2006 08:48:00 -0500 (EST) From: Lehanover@aol.com Message-ID: <289.54bca77.311b508c@aol.com> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 08:47:56 EST Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 6 port? To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1139406476" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5022 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1139406476 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/8/2006 2:21:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, billdube@killacycle.com writes: If the six ports didn't make more HP, then Mazda wouldn't have gone through the trouble and expense to make them. In an airplane, as long as it can idle, you don't care about low-end torque. The prop absorbs HP proportional to the cube of the RPM. Thus, you are spinning mighty fast before any torque to speak of is required. At that point, you are on the curve for the manifold with all the valves open. Indeed, the six port needs a properly tuned manifold to make the extra HP. If you are going to put a simple log on the end of some short runners, then there is no point of using a six port because the four port will make the same HP. It will be a few months, but we shall see what HP I get when the dust settles. :^) Bill Dube' If everyone had the same capability on the intake design and fabrication skills that you appear to have then the answer to the question would be: everyone should us a 6 port because it is more fun, more difficult, will take longer, will cost more and may have more power, than a 4 port, in the remote event that the engines being compared have stock internals. However, that was not the question. Anyone who suggests Pporting the new engine sounds to me like a novice about to make a high dollar mistake. The short apex seals will not survive crossing the Pport with adequate life span. I have yet to see anyone bother to Pport one. Some folks buy the rotors to get the lighter weight, but they recut the seal grooves to use the 3MM seals. The 4port version can produce enough power to win the Sun 100, anytime its run. As Tracy can advise. It can do well even with a less than ideal intake system. So, everything you said is true. I support you 100%. Lynn E. Hanover -------------------------------1139406476 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 2/8/2006 2:21:05 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 billdube@killacycle.com writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>If the=20 six ports didn't make more HP, then Mazda wouldn't have gone through
t= he=20 trouble and expense to make them.

In an airplane, as long as it can= =20 idle, you don't care about low-end torque.

The prop absorbs HP=20 proportional to the cube of the RPM. Thus, you are
spinning mighty fas= t=20 before any torque to speak of is required. At that
point, you are on t= he=20 curve for the manifold with all the valves open.

Indeed, the six po= rt=20 needs a properly tuned manifold to make the extra HP.
If you are going= to=20 put a simple log on the end of some short runners, then
there is no po= int=20 of using a six port because the four port will make the
same HP.
It=20 will be a few months, but we shall see what HP I get when the dust=20
settles. :^)

Bill Dube'

If everyone had the same capability on the intake design and fabricatio= n=20 skills that you appear to have then the answer to the question would be:=20 everyone should us a 6 port because it is more fun, more difficult, will tak= e=20 longer, will cost more and may have more power, than a 4 port, in the remote= =20 event that the engines being compared have stock internals.

However, that was not the question.

Anyone who suggests Pporting the new engine sounds to me like a novice=20 about to make a high dollar mistake.

The short apex seals will not survive crossing the Pport with adequate=20= life=20 span. I have yet to see anyone bother to Pport one. Some folks buy the rotor= s to=20 get the lighter weight, but they recut the seal grooves to use the 3MM=20 seals.

The 4port version can produce enough power to win the Sun 100, anytime=20= its=20 run. As Tracy can advise. It can do well even with a less than ideal intake=20 system.

So, everything you said is true. I support you 100%.

Lynn E. Hanover

-------------------------------1139406476--