X-Mozilla-Keys:                                                                                 
Paul Yaw wrote:

Paul wrote:

PY, I really appreciate this type of guidance on the best route to more
power but you confused me with your comments here on intake tuning.
 First you suggested using the turbo block (4port?) then talked about intake
tuning that only applied to the 6 port. Does this mean there is no point in
looking at tuning the 4 port intake? What did I miss?

What I meant was to use the Turbo II rotor housings.  The six port
housings have a goofy insert in the exhaust port which takes some of the
bark out of the exhaust note, and hurts the flow considerably.

Also, to PY, Bruce and the other engine guys that have done it, there seems
to be several of us in the "audience" that want to see concensus guidelines
on  the various approaches to more power: ie an expanded "bang for buck"
scale. Would you be willing to give us your thoughts? Would the "bfb" order
be:
Carburetted Turbo block with high comp rotors
Turbo block with turbo charging
3 rotor carb
3 rotor turbo    etc.
And where do FI, EI, peripheral porting and nitrous fit in the bfb scale?

Nobody wants to hear this, but the most important thing is to tune the
motor on the dyno with the exact same exhaust and fuel system that will
be in the plane.  Another thing no one wants to hear is that Powersport
has the hot setup simply BECAUSE it is an optimized package rather than
a collection of parts that may or may not work well together.  I'm sure
that a lot of theorizing went into this package, but the real power
numbers, not the theory determined the final configuration.

PY

We want to hear it Paul. But we all can't afford dyno time. PL
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org