Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.133.158; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au
Message-ID: <003a01c57130$77cd2870$04f9ecdc@george>
From: "George Lendich" <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-1001547@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Manifold Thoughts - 6 to 4 ports
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:29:02 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


>
> > 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?
>
>
> I'm already thinking of a PP engine. By the looks of it from PL's tests it
> makes about the same power as turbo, without the weight and more simple?
> I don't know how it will compare at altitude?
> Buly

Good on ya! Buly.