X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 22:55:53 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from sfa.gami.com ([68.89.254.162] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.4) with ESMTP id 1405871 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 09:43:58 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.89.254.162; envelope-from=gwbraly@gami.com Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sfa.gami.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E4129C05E for ; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:43:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: from sdf1.mail.taturbo.com (unknown [10.10.10.173]) by sfa.gami.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D15AE29C06E for ; Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:43:12 -0500 (CDT) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C6D996.0D021EAE" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Backfires LOP X-Original-Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 08:43:11 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: Backfires LOP Thread-Index: AcbZShAWozqgtSsnRGyZUjL+cLST3AAS1d9Q From: "George Braly" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.3.2 (20050629) (Debian) at gami.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C6D996.0D021EAE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Scott, =20 There is some good information in Part I of that series.=20 =20 But some of the conclusions and some of the observations and comments in those sections and especially in the other parts of that series are rather obviously strongly influenced by some older traditional concepts that are inconsistent with known data and readily repeatable experiments.=20 =20 Regards, George =20 _____ =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Sky2high@aol.com Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 11:39 PM To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: [LML] Re: Backfires LOP =20 Walter, =20 OK, I'm not good at a treatise on Lean Misfire. I was slightly wrong or partially correct. Anyway, if you consider your belief that there is no such thing as lean misfire is (depending on the meaning of "is") secure, you may still want to read CAFE's Ignition Dynamics I at =20 http://cafefoundation.org/v2/research_reports.php =20 Scroll down to the report. =20 Enjoy,=20 =20 Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96 Aurora, IL (KARR) A man has got to know his limitations. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C6D996.0D021EAE Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

Scott,

 

There is some good information in = Part I of that series.

 

But some of the conclusions and = some of the observations and comments in those sections and especially in the = other parts of that series   are  rather obviously strongly = influenced by some older traditional concepts that are inconsistent with known data and  readily = repeatable experiments.

 

 Regards,  = George

 

From: = Lancair Mailing List = [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Sky2high@aol.com
Sent: Friday, September = 15, 2006 11:39 PM
To: Lancair Mailing List
Subject: [LML] Re: = Backfires LOP

 

Walter,

 

=

OK, I'm not good at a treatise on = Lean Misfire.  I was slightly wrong or partially correct. Anyway, if you consider your belief that there is no such thing as lean misfire is = (depending on the meaning of "is") secure, you may still want to read = CAFE's Ignition Dynamics I at

 

=

 

=

Scroll down to the = report.

 

=

Enjoy, =

 

=

Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, = IL (KARR)

A man has got to know his limitations.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C6D996.0D021EAE--