X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.241.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3541518 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 23:50:45 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.39; envelope-from=rv-4mike@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090310035004.QSPM10385.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:50:04 -0400 Received: from wills ([68.105.85.56]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id RFq21b00P1CvZmk04Fq5kT; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 23:50:05 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=BQK-xGKPAAAA:8 a=-ZuN7NHRhRqbxDgGChsA:9 a=5oQlRVza20icMbn762IA:7 a=wkRs9Agzm3_kkeJyH5l7_on1VqcA:4 a=5FtdkfQUxfIA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=87gsVg4vrSMswrKB:21 a=uyUZzT_tVkdZM7ht:21 a=UretUmmEAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=N3gI5IyyxvNbbcCqqxQA:9 a=EECMh-dNRxFtH5YGU-EA:7 a=PwCnkOhjoCY3RB5Jim5JfnWIARwA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10 a=iVkDmfvjeKcA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <007801c9a133$4ab045c0$38556944@wills> From: "Mike Wills" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: DNA Muffler Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:50:01 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0075_01C9A0F8.9DF6F1B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0075_01C9A0F8.9DF6F1B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, the other big question is does it actually muffle? If the best = thing that can be said about it is that it's surviving I'd be a little = disappointed. I know its hard to judge but how about your opinion = regarding the volume? Thanks, Mike Wills ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:38 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: DNA Muffler "sounds good" Mark. My guess is that the 2" restrictor is in the = correct place now. Don't think it would be as effective before the = muffler. But the big question is, did the 3 to 2 " reducer cause any noticeable = power loss? I plan to do the same thing on my plane when time allows. Tracy On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Mark Steitle = wrote: Mike,=20 It may be a little premature to declare it a winner, but with ~10 = hrs on it now, it is holding up better than anything I've tried so far. = Keep in mind that this is DNA's best muffler, rated for 1000hp. It is = made of fairly thick SS, .030 if I recall, much thicker material than = most mufflers. I had to add a 3" to 2" taper to the outlet in order for = it to be acceptable in the noise category, but that was surprisingly = effective in reducing the exhaust noise to an acceptable level. (Maybe = I should have just put the reducer on the 3" downpipe and saved some = weight.) Anyway, when it passes 25 hours, I'll post another update. At = this time it is looking very promising. Mark S. On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Mike Wills wrote: Mark, Any update on the DNA muffler? Mike Wills RV-4 N144MW ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mark Steitle=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 7:05 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] DNA Muffler Does anyone on the list have any real-life rotary experience = with the DNA Gen II muffler = (http://www.dnamufflers.com/DNA/main_DNA.html)? It is an interesting = design in that it has no packing material to burn out. Instead, it = utilizes ladder-rungs, which they call "internal sound diffusers", which = resemble a chain of DNA down through the center of the muffler body, = which is made of 304 SS. Their web site claims that the racers use them = with great success. From speaking with a sales rep, they claim there = the rotary crowd uses them too. I'm considering purchasing one of their = FULL THROTTLE COLLECTOR mufflers (P/N 1040), but thought I would check = to see if anyone else has used this style muffler. This muffler has a = 3" inlet/outlet with a 4" body. So it is compact enough to fit inside = my cowl. My exhaust header has a 3" swivel joint, so it should be a = good fit. =20 Mark S. ------=_NextPart_000_0075_01C9A0F8.9DF6F1B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well, the other big question is does it = actually=20 muffle? If the best thing that can be said about it is that it's = surviving=20 I'd be a little disappointed. I know its hard to judge but how about = your=20 opinion regarding the volume?
 
Thanks,
 
Mike Wills
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tracy=20 Crook
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 = 8:38=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: DNA=20 Muffler

"sounds good" Mark.  My guess is that the 2" = restrictor is=20 in the correct place now.  Don't think it would be as effective = before=20 the muffler.

But the big question is, did the 3 to 2 " reducer = cause=20 any noticeable power loss?   I plan to do the same thing on = my plane=20 when time allows.

Tracy

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Mark Steitle = <msteitle@gmail.com> = wrote:
Mike,
 
It may be a little premature to declare it a winner, but with = ~10 hrs=20 on it now, it is holding up better than anything I've tried so = far. =20 Keep in mind that this is DNA's best muffler, rated for = 1000hp. =20 It is made of fairly thick SS, .030 if I recall, much thicker = material=20 than most mufflers.  I had to add a 3" to = 2" taper to=20 the outlet in order for it to be acceptable in the noise category, = but=20 that was surprisingly effective in reducing the = exhaust noise=20 to an acceptable level.  (Maybe I should have just put the = reducer=20 on the 3" downpipe and saved some weight.)  Anyway, when it = passes 25=20 hours, I'll post another update.  At this time it is = looking very=20 promising.
 
Mark S.

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Mike Wills = <rv-4mike@cox.net> wrote:
Mark,
 
 Any update on the DNA=20 muffler?
 
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
-----=20 Original Message -----
From:=20 Mark Steitle
To:=20 Rotary motors in=20 aircraft
Sent:=20 Friday, January 16, 2009 7:05 AM
Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] DNA Muffler

Does anyone on the list have any real-life rotary = experience with the DNA Gen II muffler (http://www.dnamufflers.com/DNA/main_DNA.html)?  It is an=20 interesting design in that it has no packing material to burn = out. =20 Instead, it utilizes ladder-rungs, which they call "internal = sound=20 diffusers", which resemble a chain of DNA down through the = center=20 of the muffler body, which is made of 304 SS.  Their web = site=20 claims that the racers use them with great success.  From = speaking=20 with a sales rep, they claim there the rotary crowd uses them = too. =20 I'm considering purchasing one of their FULL THROTTLE COLLECTOR = mufflers=20 (P/N 1040), but thought I would check to see if anyone else = has=20 used this style muffler.  This muffler has a 3" = inlet/outlet with a=20 4" body.  So it is compact enough to fit inside my = cowl. =20 My exhaust header has a 3" swivel joint, so it should be a good=20 fit. 
 
Mark=20 = S.


------=_NextPart_000_0075_01C9A0F8.9DF6F1B0--