X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 84 [XXX] (57%) BODY: contains "ambien" obfuscated (43%) RECEIVED: Received headers not consistent with Juno "FROM:" Return-Path: Received: from m12.lax.untd.com ([64.136.30.75] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with SMTP id 2019494 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 01 May 2007 10:58:26 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.30.75; envelope-from=alwick@juno.com Received: from m12.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m12.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABDDQXLMAGYMZZA for (sender ); Tue, 1 May 2007 07:57:15 -0700 (PDT) X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkGOBZKfZBUfXSZicBUsINzTM96JWfdRkXg== Received: (from alwick@juno.com) by m12.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id MLNRCU88; Tue, 01 May 2007 07:56:47 PDT To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 07:53:10 -0700 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Throttle body size/ other "Paul" issues Message-ID: <20070501.075602.2560.3.alwick@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.49 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--__JNP_000_731d.4a80.0403 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 8-6,11-16,23-32767 From: al p wick X-ContentStamp: 5:2:3894372231 X-MAIL-INFO:2274e0815439b5709dfd60b5a1916531a124 X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m12.lax.untd.com|alwick@juno.com This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ----__JNP_000_731d.4a80.0403 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is very important concept..... When you have a theory(pauls TB diameter), try to find ways to convert it to facts. Usually there are simple ways to do so. You could also compare rpm with throttle plate closed a bit compared to full throttle. If no difference, that too would indicate the theory bogus. Although I prefer Tracy's approach. -al wick On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:18:53 -0400 "Tracy Crook" writes: Here's a simple test you can do to remove the 'opinion factor' out of this discussion. If your manifold pressure at WOT is the same as ambient barometric pressure (at low altitude), there is nothing a larger TB will do to improve it. If MP is less than ambient, start looking at your intake path factors like inlet, SCAT tubing (if used), air filter, and anything else in the air path. If none of these are the limiting factor, then and only then should you think about going to a larger TB. ----__JNP_000_731d.4a80.0403 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is very important concept..... When you have a theory(pauls TB=20 diameter), try to find ways to convert it to facts. Usually there are = simple=20 ways to do so. You could also compare rpm with throttle plate closed a bit= =20 compared to full throttle. If no difference, that too would indicate the = theory=20 bogus. Although I prefer Tracy's approach.
 
-al wick
 
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:18:53 -0400 "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com> writes:
 
   Here's a simple test you can do to remove the 'opinion= =20 factor' out of this discussion.  If your manifold pressure at WOT is= the=20 same as ambient barometric pressure (at low altitude), there is nothing a= =20 larger TB will do to improve it.  If MP is less than ambient, = start=20 looking at your intake path factors like inlet, SCAT tubing (if used), = air=20 filter, and anything else in the air path.  If none of these are the= =20 limiting factor, then and only then should you think about going to a = larger=20 TB.
 
----__JNP_000_731d.4a80.0403--