Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com
Message-ID: <000701c6b262$b4d00a70$2402a8c0@edward2>
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-1320545@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Test
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:27:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Atomization was indeed a benefit when using carburetors with "suck through" 
turbo systems.  The spinning compressor wheel reportedly did give some 
measurable benefits in mileage (when not under boost) due to better 
atomization of fuel.  When I turbo charged two Honda Civics back in 1976-78, 
I could tell a small increase in mileage.

 However, in our installations,  with fuel injectors down stream of the 
spinning blades, I personally doubt there is any atomization benefit since 
all the compressor blades are churning - is air.

Ed
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.com
http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Brooks" <cozy4pilot@gmail.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 12:18 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test


> Ed,
> The only other comment I could make in favor of the turbo, is that it's
> suppose to provide increased fuel economy, even at low boost levels by
> improving the atomization of the fuel charge.
>
> I'm not sure about how true this is, but that is what I read somewhere 
> along
> the line.
>
> I've had my T04 for about a year and a half now, but decided not to 
> replace
> it until I got it moved.  For one, the stock turbo hasn't given me any
> trouble, and it will require a fair amount of work to get it changed over.
> My turbo is the same identical turbo that Paul and Lou are running.  It's 
> a
> Garrett .96 A/r with an s-trim compressor.
>
> I'd like to have gone higher than the .96, but the exhaust side turbine 
> gets
> really large if you go any bigger.  Paul has had good luck so far with 
> their
> turbo.
>
> I'm aware of the oil temperature problem.  I had told him early on about 
> my
> concerns when I first saw their set up.  I told him about the problems 
> that
> I had, and what it took to resolve it.  They are now increasing the air 
> flow
> to the cooler, and may go to 2 oil coolers depending on how their next 
> test
> go.  I'm sure hat they'll get it worked out.
> I rode in their plane on a fast taxi, and it is amazing how much power it
> has.  As I recalled it dyno'd at 580 HP at 10lbs of boost.  Their engine
> sounds like it is revving 10,000 RPM's when it throttles up, even though 
> it
> is only 4-5 K. I guess that I'm used to the way mine sounds, and they have
> that additional rotor adding to the exhaust note.
>
> I can't wait to hear it fly.  It should be interesting to say the least.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On
> Behalf Of Ed Anderson
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:47 AM
> To: Rotary motors in aircraft
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test
>
>
> Yep!  I'm sitting here monitoring some remodeling contractors converting 
> our
> garage to the wife's desires.  But, tomorrow, I get to raise my hangar 
> door
> frame!!  Then I can put on the sheets and start configuring the hydraulic
> system that opens the doorl
>
> I'm afraid I agree with you Steve.  The stock Mazda turbo simply was not
> designed for the operating stresses we are able to put on it.  I believe 
> if
> you use modest boost only for take off (short term) and not for cruise 
> speed
> then it may last a decent amount of time, but that sort of defeats the 
> idea
> of the turbo providing at least sea level NA type power for high altitude
> high speed cruise.
>
> I have two turbos sitting on my work bench - I've toyed with the idea on 
> and
> off for years, but just couldn't convince myself that I needed one since I
> tend to cruise at lower airspeeds to keep the fuel burn and $$ down.  If I
> needed some extra boost just for takeoff, I'd probably just go NO2.  But, 
> if
> I were to do a turbo, it would not be with the stock Mazda turbo but would
> use something like the TO4.
>
> Yes, I tend not to fly at all in the July August time frame - just too hot
> for me to enjoy.  Of coursed, I could get up before the break of dawn and
> find some cooler air.  But, I tend to do my tinkering during those months
> and fly starting September.
>
> Paul and Lou are working out some oil cooling issues before jumping into
> their test program in earnest.
>
> Ed
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Brooks" <cozy4pilot@gmail.com>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:36 AM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test
>
>
>> Hi Ed,
>> Things are kind of quiet with Oshkosh going on.  I have been following 
>> the
>> thread on the exhaust issues with the mufflers.
>>
>> I still haven't decided whether to keep the turbo or not.  I haven't had
>> any
>> trouble with mine, but I do believe that it is just a matter of time.  I
>> also am very careful about how hard I push it.
>>
>> I have all of the parts to switch to a T04 turbo, except for the exhaust
>> pipe and heat shield.  I think that I'd like to try it without the turbo
>> first, just to see how much power I have, and how much difference it 
>> makes
>> in the temps.  The 30+ lbs savings in weight would also be a plus.  I 
>> want
>> to see what kind of result that Buly gets running without a muffler.
>> Seems
>> like it would be pretty loud, but I may be wrong.
>>
>> Whatever I do, I'll probably do after I get the plane moved up to NC.  I
>> have the hours flown off.  I just need to fly it up here.  August doesn't
>> provide the best flying weather though, so I'll probably wait until
>> September to make the move.
>>
>> Steve Brooks
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On
>> Behalf Of Ed Anderson
>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 10:03 AM
>> To: Rotary motors in aircraft
>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Test
>>
>>
>> It works
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Steve Brooks" <cozy4pilot@gmail.com>
>> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 9:58 AM
>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Test
>>
>>
>>>I just changed my email address for Fly Rotary over to my Gmail account,
>>>and
>>> wanted to make sure that it is working.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>>
>>
>> --
>> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>