Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #66279
From: lehanover lehanover@aol.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbos.........
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 13:47:25 +0000 (UTC)
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
As you can see on this dyno sheet much power is available where most folks like to run aircraft Rotaries.

The ports you see in that picture are designed to operate best at 9,400 RPM, at 250HP, however that is a 12-A engine.
2292 CCs vice 2900 CCs for a 13-B, so more power from a 13-B. So ports designed for best power at say 5,500 RPM would have a shorter top (Closing Point) and a smaller bridge opening. I do not let any of the side seal ends to cross over the port so side seal damage is not a factor. So very nearly stock service life minus the wear you would expect from spending hours of operation at full throttle. With synthetic 2 cycle oil in the fuel and in the sump I suspect (but do not know) about 500 to 1,000 hours. A hot compression check or a hot
leakdown test will tell the tail.........LEH 

In a message dated 8/28/2020 7:31:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:

One word....Turbo normalizing. Ok that's two words, but that's my plan.

In your opinion, how reliable is a bridge port engine? At what RPM do you see the benefits?

Les Criscillo
Pilot, Brewmaster, Maker

From: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> on behalf of lehanover lehanover@aol.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 9:34:07 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Turbos.........

We don't need no stinking turbos.....when we can have 250HP bridge ports......


Lynn E. Hanover
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster