Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 762934 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:39:53 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.65; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050228173907.CSUA2031.imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:39:07 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: [FlyRotary]EWP slander was Belt rumnations; soliciting Opinions of racers please.... Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:39:46 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c51dbc$806b9b00$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C51D8A.35D12B00" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C51D8A.35D12B00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My guess is that the EWP will ONLY work if the water flow path is cleaned up sufficiently to allow it to work. I think Rusty's experiment with using both has a high likelyhood of failure, because he will be using the EWP with the thermostat and the tortured path that the EDWP forces the water through. It will be overwhelmingly convincing if does work with the odds stacked against it so much, but at most will only be a qualified failure. =20 Hi Ernest, =20 =20 Why are you using the word "failure" when speaking of my EWP = installation? It's working flawlessly. For all the people who say the pump won't flow enough water, I wish you could stand beside my engine when I turn the = EWP on. The sound of water flowing through the evap cores is impressive. = This is using AN-12 hoses. =20 =20 BTW, I have no thermostat, but not because I don't want one. If the mechanical pump failed, and the thermostat was closed, the water would = not circulate through the block with the EWP only, due to the way the water = pump housing is made. That's a pretty unlikely set of events, but still possible. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (shhh, don't tell my EWP it's not working)=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C51D8A.35D12B00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

My guess is that the EWP will ONLY work if the water = flow path=20 is
cleaned up sufficiently to allow it to work.  I think Rusty's = experiment
with using both has a high likelyhood of failure, because = he will=20 be
using the EWP with the thermostat and the tortured path that the=20 EDWP
forces the water through.  It will be overwhelmingly = convincing if=20 does
work with the odds stacked against it so much, but at most will = only=20 be
a qualified failure.

 
Hi = Ernest, =20
 
Why are = you using the=20 word "failure" when speaking of my EWP installation?  It's working=20 flawlessly.  For all the people who say the pump won't flow enough = water,=20 I wish you could stand beside my engine when I turn the EWP = on.  The=20 sound of water  flowing through the evap cores is=20 impressive.  This is using AN-12 hoses.  =
 
BTW, I = have=20 no thermostat, but not because I don't want one.  If the = mechanical=20 pump failed, and the thermostat was closed, the water would not = circulate=20 through the block with the EWP only, due to the way the water pump = housing is=20 made.  That's a pretty unlikely set of events, but still=20 possible. 
 
Cheers,
Rusty (shhh, don't tell my=20 EWP it's not working) 
 
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C51D8A.35D12B00--