X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-iy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.210.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTPS id 5040714 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:36:20 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.210.180; envelope-from=fluffysheap@gmail.com Received: by iyh42 with SMTP id 42so6179963iyh.25 for ; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:35:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=eq9KgtWgh+BZW+DVJ/bLUpX9jg3d9Gk+CNQQGFHFdQI=; b=u5Ezr/SEQqDMD6OKvPZTPkbp3Da84f/JYzyKa2/4U8BxhudwU37zpYAdqvAIqO8t2a zFigMI7QygbADgNdaMhVADyCPSrkDKhRThM43l+GWm+AdbFCwVTHAS5n2+hkQwt8ES5p KeNCU0wj3HG6q16QNXBJfwS2msVlB6JIYOmOo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.24.193 with SMTP id w1mr4167346ibb.41.1309638943607; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:35:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.154.17 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Jul 2011 13:35:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 14:35:43 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 20B Installation From: William Wilson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001517740cb2048ba604a71c1488 --001517740cb2048ba604a71c1488 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 It also depends on your goal. If you want to fly most economically or at high altitudes, the 13B turbo setup is probably better. If you just want to go fast, the 20B will produce as much power as a typical 13B turbo. The 13B is cheaper and easier to find parts for (for those relatively few parts which aren't common to both). Weight is probably similar. On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Thomas Mann wrote: > No turbo for me. > > I was looking at the turbo two rotor and decided (based on weight and > simplicity) to go with the three rotor N/A instead. > > I felt that to add the complexity of the turbo took away more than it gave. > What draws me to the rotary in the first place is the simplicity. If I add > the turbo, I've lost this level of simplicity. > > T Mann > > On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Kelly Troyer wrote: > >> Thomas, >> Turbo ??...................... >> >> --001517740cb2048ba604a71c1488 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It also depends on your goal.=A0 If you want to fly most economically or at= high altitudes, the 13B turbo setup is probably better.=A0 If you just wan= t to go fast, the 20B will produce as much power as a typical 13B turbo.=A0= The 13B is cheaper and easier to find parts for (for those relatively few = parts which aren't common to both).=A0 Weight is probably similar.

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Thomas Mann = <thomasmann5= 1@gmail.com> wrote:
No turbo for me.

I was looking at the turbo two rotor an= d decided (based on weight and simplicity) to go with the three rotor N/A i= nstead.=A0

I felt that to add the complexity of th= e turbo took away more than it gave. What draws me to the rotary in the fir= st place is the simplicity. If I add the turbo, I've lost this level of= simplicity.

T Mann

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Kelly Troyer <= keltro@att.net><= /span> wrote:
Thomas,
=A0=A0=A0=A0 Turbo ??......................


--001517740cb2048ba604a71c1488--