X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from smtpauth04.mail.atl.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.64] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 1008068 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:40:45 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.64; envelope-from=jerryhey@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=YHqrLrheTWrQ6iKCyt6gY1O8/u0QbdZruiO5/GEWySTQbrjE40o0PzY8H3hHmF7s; h=Received:Date:Subject:Content-Type:Mime-Version:From:To:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [63.189.96.96] (helo=earthlink.net) by smtpauth04.mail.atl.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DkT3o-00077i-ST for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:40:01 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:42:08 -0500 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Injector Position (was Re: Makingprogress on Chris n Dave's Velocity Engine) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-6--740991743 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) From: Jerry Hey To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) X-ELNK-Trace: 8104856d7830ec6b1aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79dcf66cc5457311aee52a2dc2d0c04613350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 63.189.96.96 --Apple-Mail-6--740991743 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed You are right on Dave. If this is a problem we will soon know. Evap=20 cooling may be more intense in the p port runners because of the=20 velocities involved. I intend to provide optional heated air from=20 the cool tube exhaust to the throttle body regardless. Jerry On Monday, June 20, 2005, at 03:06 PM, david mccandless wrote: >> On PL's recent PP dyno run, he stated that with the injectors placed=20= >> near the entry of the runners, there was considerable evaporative=20 >> cooling taking place and as the tubes were running very cold VE=20 >> should be good. The worry to me here is that with the TB at the other=20= >> end of the runner,ie close to the port, there is a real risk of ice=20= >> build up on the throttle body butterfly. The old bugbear of carb ice=20= >> is back. FWIW, Dave McC > >> since the >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry Hey >>> =A0 >>> based on Paul Lamar's current p port testing there is no problem=20 >>> with placing the injectors at the far end of the runners. This is=20 >>> also backed up by an article on the internet (How to Fabricate an=20 >>> Intake Manifold) The idle issue is not with injector location but=20 >>> rather with butterfly location.= --Apple-Mail-6--740991743 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=ISO-8859-1 You are right on Dave. If this is a problem we will soon know. Evap cooling may be more intense in the p port runners because of the velocities involved. I intend to provide optional heated air from the cool tube exhaust to the throttle body regardless. Jerry On Monday, June 20, 2005, at 03:06 PM, david mccandless wrote: On PL's recent PP dyno run, he stated that with the injectors placed near the entry of the runners, there was considerable evaporative cooling taking place and as the tubes were running very cold VE should be good. The worry to me here is that with the TB at the other end of the runner,ie close to the port, there is a real risk of ice build up on the throttle body butterfly. The old bugbear of carb ice is back. FWIW, Dave McC since the=20 Arial----- Original Message ----- From: 0000,0000,EEEDJerry Hey =A0 based on Paul Lamar's current p port testing there is no problem with placing the injectors at the far end of the runners. This is also backed up by an article on the internet (How to Fabricate an Intake Manifold) The idle issue is not with injector location but rather with butterfly location.= --Apple-Mail-6--740991743--