X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 18:27:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from secure5.liveoakhosting.com ([64.49.254.21] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTPS id 1010578 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:37:31 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.49.254.21; envelope-from=walter@advancedpilot.com Received: (qmail 2688 invoked by uid 2520); 22 Jun 2005 16:36:36 -0500 Received: from 216.107.97.170 by secure5.liveoakhosting.com (envelope-from , uid 2020) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.84/921. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:0(216.107.97.170):. Processed in 0.067306 secs); 22 Jun 2005 21:36:36 -0000 Received: from 216-107-97-170.wan.networktel.net (HELO ?10.0.1.4?) (216.107.97.170) by secure5.liveoakhosting.com with SMTP; 22 Jun 2005 16:36:36 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Original-Message-Id: <93cb1a01843562ef333dd6f36f5179e5@advancedpilot.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Walter Atkinson Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Induction air filter X-Original-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:36:35 -0500 X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) No. It did not. It was simply filter drag. Induction path wasn't part of the test. Walter On Jun 22, 2005, at 12:46 PM, wrote: Walter, Did your flow tests include a 90 degree turn with the entrance losses associated with us updraft carb types ?? It was the return to laminar flow that suported Vans' data.. Thx for the interest... Don Skeele > > From: "Marvin Kaye" > Date: 2005/06/22 Wed AM 10:26:38 EDT > To: "Lancair Mailing List" > Subject: [LML] Re: Induction air filter > > Posted for Walter Atkinson : > > FWIW, I ran a test. > > 1) MP measured with NO FILTER AT ALL. > > 2) MP measured with paper filter. > > 3) MP measured with bracket filter > > 4) MP measured with K&N filter. > > > They resulted in the following order of MP, from highest to lowest: > > NO filter, PAPER filter, K&N filter, BRACKET filter. The two > middle ones > were very close to the same--frankly, too close to call as being any > different. > > YMMV. > > Walter > > > > -- > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/ > -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/