X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 64 [XX] (100%) BODY: contains "ambien" obfuscated Return-Path: Received: from imo-m23.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.4] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with ESMTP id 2019743 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 01 May 2007 12:55:35 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.4; envelope-from=Lehanover@aol.com Received: from Lehanover@aol.com by imo-m23.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id q.d45.7a89ae4 (52373) for ; Tue, 1 May 2007 12:54:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from WEBMAIL-MC01 (webmail-mc01.webmail.aol.com [64.12.170.78]) by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id MAILCIAAOLM027-cc95463770c55; Tue, 01 May 2007 12:54:29 -0400 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Throttle body size/ other "Paul" issues Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 12:54:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: lehanover@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8C95A2884BB5F6C_180C_23FB_WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 25698 Received: from 68.164.239.202 by WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com (64.12.170.78) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 01 May 2007 12:54:29 -0400 Message-Id: <8C95A2884BB5F6C-180C-144B@WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com> X-AOL-IP: 64.12.170.78 X-Spam-Flag: NO ----------MB_8C95A2884BB5F6C_180C_23FB_WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Years ago when dynoing engines, I discovered that California engine dynos added a multiplier to the HP calculation, such as the operators hat size or street address. When they came to Ohio where no such fudge factor was available, the air in Ohio was the same for everyone, and we could yank them down the straightaways. HP sells engines. Tire thrust at the contact patch wins races. Lynn E. Hanover -----Original Message----- From: alwick@juno.com To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Sent: Tue, 1 May 2007 7:53 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Throttle body size/ other "Paul" issues 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. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. ----------MB_8C95A2884BB5F6C_180C_23FB_WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

Years ago when dynoing engines, I discovered that California engine dynos added a multiplier to the HP calculation, such as the operators hat size or street address. When they came to Ohio where no such fudge factor was available, the air in Ohio was the same for everyone, and we could yank them down the straightaways. HP sells engines. Tire thrust at the contact patch wins races.

Lynn E. Hanover

-----Original Message-----
From: alwick@juno.com
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Sent: Tue, 1 May 2007 7:53 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Throttle body size/ other "Paul" issues

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" <lors01@msn.com> 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.

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

----------MB_8C95A2884BB5F6C_180C_23FB_WEBMAIL-MC01.sysops.aol.com--