wrote:=20 Hey, Kevin, you can't talk about my innovative mounting approach = that way. Side ways, 90 degrees, "Plugs Up" all OK - but not crooked = {:>). Ed ----- Original Message -----=20 From: kevin lane=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 1:21 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] design steps =20 I have purchased a turrentine renesis to eventually replace the = O-320 in my -6A. I was playing with intake manifold ideas and realized = that the engine mount could dictate the design possibilities = significantly, especially with the exhaust, which requires three tubes = (like my prior 20B). the Schertz beam type mount puts the diagonal = tubes way outboard, and, it seems to me, provides solid mounting tabs = for radiators and such. the standard bed-mount looks like the front = diagonals will conflict with the exhaust and affect my intake manifold = design (thinking same side). I haven't built a plywood firewall yet, = just eyeballing things.=20 when I was building my rv-8/20B the engine mount was ordered = and I worked around it. are these the normal steps, or do I need to = mock up both concurrently? is there that many choices in the mount = geometry for the -6A? would changing my plane to a taildragger benefit = me much? Ed's no help 'cause he got his in 90 degrees crooked! :-) = kevin (portland/cape cod trip Saturday)=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7ED64.7B4AF150 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well, actually, "Yes" to both your = questions. But, I=20 consider the one - straight as an arrow and the other just a "pointing = factor" -=20 which happens to point in the wrong direction now that I went from the = 2.17 to=20 the 2.85 gear box. But, sigh, what can I do but keep the engine = from=20 finding out that its not suppose to work that way. {:>)

----- Original Message -----

From:=20 Thomas Jakits

To: Rotary motors in = aircraft

Sent: Sunday, September 02, = 2007 12:47=20 PM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: design = steps

Hey Ed,

there may be more to that!:

How about "outlawed", "heresy installation?", "impossible", = "rebellious",=20 " no way", "450 degrees", hey I'll find more if you want!!

About the "crooked":

a) Any Tracy-parts in there??

b) Any prop- offset degrees??

TJ :)

On 8/31/07, Ed=20 Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com&g= t;=20 wrote:=20

Hey, Kevin, you can't talk about my = innovative=20 mounting approach that way. Side ways, 90 degrees, "Plugs Up" = all OK -=20 but not crooked {:>).

Ed

----- Original Message ----- =

From: = kevin lane =

To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft

Sent: Friday, August 31, = 2007 1:21=20 AM

Subject: [FlyRotary] design = steps

I have purchased a turrentine = renesis to=20 eventually replace the O-320 in my -6A. I was playing with = intake=20 manifold ideas and realized that the engine mount could dictate = the design=20 possibilities significantly, especially with the exhaust, which = requires=20 three tubes (like my prior 20B). the Schertz beam type mount = puts=20 the diagonal tubes way outboard, and, it seems to me, provides = solid=20 mounting tabs for radiators and such. the standard bed-mount = looks=20 like the front diagonals will conflict with the exhaust and affect = my=20 intake manifold design (thinking same side). I haven't built = a=20 plywood firewall yet, just eyeballing things.

when I was = building my=20 rv-8/20B the engine mount was ordered and I worked around=20 it. are these the normal steps, or do I need to = mock up=20 both concurrently? is there that many choices in the mount = geometry=20 for the -6A? would changing my plane to a taildragger = benefit me=20 much? Ed's no help 'cause he got his in 90 degrees crooked!=20 :-) kevin (portland/cape cod trip Saturday)=20 =

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7ED64.7B4AF150--