Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #7144
From: David Leonard <Daveleonard@cox.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Dave's pump problems and Rotor Poll
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:37:50 -0700
To: 'Rotary motors in aircraft' <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message

 

Hi Dave.  The proposed scheme is much better.  In fact, it's EXACTLY what I had in rev-1 (big low mounted rad, same vent port, etc), and also the way it's done in a 3rd gen car.   Mazda refers to the pressurized can as an AST (air separator tank).  Mine flowed just dandy with and without a thermostat.  The only problem was that it was a pain to fill, since my pressure cap wasn't the high point.  

 

During my rev-2 upgrade, I simplified the system further, and got rid of the AST.  I was able to mount a pressurized cap at the high point where the water outlet is, and only have a plastic jug for overflow now.   So far, this is working even better.   

 

Ok Rusty, now you have me a little confused.  Your rev-2 upgrade seems a lot like my current system.  A pressure cap (rev-2) at the rear side housing outlet (highest point in the system) is just like having a small tank there with a pressure cap on it (my current system).  I would prefer not to make the change if you think there is nothing wrong with the current system and my problem lies elsewhere.  To AST or not to AST, that is the question.

  

I ran as much as 10 psi on mine, with 9.7 rotors, but I was using 100LL fuel, and had the timing retarded a bit.  From everything I've heard, you won't really be able to tell the diff between 9.0, and 9.7.  That being said, when I upgraded my 8.5 rotors, I insisted on 9.7, rather than the 9.4 rotors.  The 8.5's are still in the attic.  They only have Mazda's test run time on them.  I'll make you a good deal :-)

 

Great data point, Thanks.  One vote for “probably maybe not worth the expense.”

 

Dave Leonard

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster