Received-SPF: softfail
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=171.68.10.87; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <43F1178D.4090300@nc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:34:37 -0500
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.4.1 (X11/20050929)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Diesel Operation
References: <list-983595@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-983595@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bob White wrote:

>Hi Ernest,
>
>I have high compression rotors (9.7:1) so maybe all I need is the turbo
>and propane. ;-)  Long ago I was thinking about adding a supercharger
>after I got the NA setup working (normalization only).  After the
>length of time this has taken, I don't think it will ever happen.
>
>Bob W. (leaky tank sealed - leak check tomorrow)
>
>  
>
Working from a fading memory here, but I believe diesels run closer to 27:1.
Ford tried to convert a gas engine to diesel operation in the '80s by 
just driving up the compression.  By all accounts, it sucked.  It ran, 
just not for long.  The high compression basically rip apart the lighter 
gas engine parts.
I don't think the rotary would suffer those issues, and it might even 
solve the problem of fuel not burning in the chamber corners, but I'm 
probably wrong.

-- 
         ,|"|"|,               Ernest Christley     |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===----     Dyke Delta Builder    |
        o|  d  |o          www.ernest.isa-geek.org  |