X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:48:46 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mx3.pshift.com ([216.57.116.8] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.9) with ESMTP id 2091152 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 08:25:18 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.57.116.8; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net Received: from ccaselt2 (unverified [216.57.118.64]) by mx3.pshift.com (Vircom SMTPRS 4.4.568.30) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 08:24:33 -0400 Received-SPF: none (mx3.pshift.com: domain of colyncase@earthlink.net does not designate any permitted senders) X-Modus-BlackList: 216.57.118.64=OK;colyncase@earthlink.net=OK X-Modus-RBL: 216.57.118.64=Excluded X-Modus-Trusted: 216.57.118.64=NO X-Modus-Audit: FALSE;0;0;0 X-Original-Message-ID: <04bb01c7a9c7$fe2f3080$0202a8c0@nvidia.com> From: "Colyn Case on earthlink" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Inconel turbos: (was What's better than a Continental IO-550 fuel system?) X-Original-Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 05:24:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04B8_01C7A98D.518B1220" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_04B8_01C7A98D.518B1220 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark S. said, The two big issues are heat and overspeed. Inconnel turbo = blades are mandatory. Where can I find out more? b.t.w. - I did check with Garrett about my turbos. They said a) they = are inconel and b) they recommend running not higher than 1650. This = surprised me so I asked if that was a hard limit. They said "We have = found they last a lot longer at 1650" so I remain a little unclear if = that is really about temps are about rpm. Since I have over-size = compressors I suspect my turbo rpms are lower than stock. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mark Steitle=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 4:38 AM Subject: [LML] Re: What's better than a Continental IO-550 fuel = system? Colyn,=20 Yes, there have been a few. Dave Leonard and Tom Parkes names comes = to mind. The rotary is a very good match for a turbo, but the problem = is finding a turbo that can stand up to the rotary. The few that have = tried it have spent a good chunk of change trying to find a combination = that will handle the severe beating that the rotary dishes out. (Higher = exhaust temps and no exhaust valves to soften the exhaust pulses.) The = good news is that a failed turbo still allows the engine to continue = running, albeit at reduced power. The "turbo guys" are getting closer = on finding the right combination for airborn rotary. =20 The two big issues are heat and overspeed. Inconnel turbo blades are = mandatory. I initially was going the turbo route, but eventually decided on the = simpler route and go n/a. I think it was a good decision. My engine is = a turbo version, so if I every decide that I want to turbo-charge, then = it will be a bit simpler undertaking.=20 Mark =20 On 6/7/07, Colyn Case on earthlink wrote:=20 Mark S., I found your post informative and interesting. Has anyone attempted a turbo installation of that engine? Colyn ------=_NextPart_000_04B8_01C7A98D.518B1220 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mark S. said, The two big issues are heat and overspeed.  Inconnel turbo = blades=20 are mandatory.
 
Where can I find out more?
 
b.t.w. - I did check with Garrett about = my=20 turbos.  They said a) they are inconel and b) they recommend = running not=20 higher than 1650.   This surprised me so I asked if that was a = hard=20 limit.  They said "We have found they last a lot longer at = 1650"  so I=20 remain a little unclear if that is really about temps are about=20 rpm.    Since I have over-size compressors I suspect my = turbo=20 rpms are lower than stock.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Mark = Steitle=20
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 = 4:38 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: What's = better than a=20 Continental IO-550 fuel system?

Colyn,
 
Yes, there have been a few.  Dave Leonard and Tom = Parkes names=20 comes to mind.  The rotary is a very good match for a turbo, but = the=20 problem is finding a turbo that can stand up to the = rotary. =20 The few that have tried it have spent a good chunk of change trying to = find a=20 combination that will handle the severe beating that the rotary dishes = out.  (Higher exhaust temps and no exhaust valves to = soften the=20 exhaust pulses.)  The good news is that a failed turbo still = allows the=20 engine to continue running, albeit at reduced power.  The "turbo = guys"=20 are getting closer on finding the right combination for airborn=20 rotary. 
 
The two big issues are heat and overspeed.  Inconnel turbo = blades=20 are mandatory.
 
I initially was going the turbo route, but eventually decided on = the=20 simpler route and go n/a.  I think it was a good decision.  = My=20 engine is a turbo version, so if I every decide that I want to = turbo-charge,=20 then it will be a bit simpler undertaking.
 
Mark

 
On 6/7/07, Colyn Case=20 on earthlink <colyncase@earthlink.net>=20 wrote:=20
Mark S.,
    I found your = post=20 informative and interesting.
    Has anyone = attempted a turbo=20 installation of that engine?
 
Colyn
=
 

= ------=_NextPart_000_04B8_01C7A98D.518B1220--