|
|
George Lendich wrote:
. I've been studying this idea for a while. Looking through
another list, there is a poster named "Judge Ito" that everyone seems to
revere for his porting prowess. His take on opening up and combining
the 6 to make it only 4 ports would give it the top end power of a
peripheal port, but would severely compromise the low end power and
idle. As Bill alluded to earlier, who cares.
I'm still building fuselage ribs, but in a few weeks I'll be digging a
lot harder to nail down this will actually work, as I begin to build an
intake manifold.
Ernest,
I would have to agree entirely - so why not make it real simple and make a
PP.
George ( down under)
That's a seems like a little bit more of a R&D program than I want to take on right now, George (and I'm fully aware that the difficulty may be more perception than reality). I'm confident that I can handle a porting job, as I've had to do a lot of metal 'sculpturing' to fit all these tubes together. Now, it's just a question of what to cut away for me.
I believe the same thing is said about a PP that is said about what I think I'd like to do...rough idle and no low-end power. Am I correct that the solution is short runners with a closely fitted throttle?
--
,|"|"|, |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
|
|