snip

This would be no problem at all if Tracy went to the 2.85:1 PSRU.
Prop rotates in right direction.

Paul Lamar

This would be a good point for me to get input on interest on the 2.85 : 1
drive.

It is now apparent that the RX-8 and the Renesis engine are actually going
to arrive so I've moved ahead on plans for the 2.85 drive.   I consider this
the main reason for using the higher ratio.  I'll be ready to cut metal on
the prototype after getting the next batch of 2.18 drives done.

Opinions vary on this but here is mine:  Unless you are swinging a long prop
(at least 75" or more) or plan to run your engine at 7000 rpm or higher, I
still think the 2.18 : 1 drive is the best compromise.  This is especially
true if your airplane is in the 200 mph or more range.  The only exception
to this may be gyros or other low speed aircraft where very wide chord or
multi-blade (4 or more) props can be used.

You don't have to commit to buy now but I'd like to get a reading on how
much interest there is in this ratio.

Tracy Crook
tcrook@rotaryaviation.com
www.rotaryaviation.com

What ever turns you on Tracy :-)

IMHO the current engine can also benefit from the 2.85:1 ratio with
the current diameter props. There is nothing fundamentally different
about the structure of a  Renesis engine that somehow makes it
better for 7000 RPM. 9000 RPM no question about it...it's better!

I went for a ride in Ian Beadle's 2.85:1 equipped airplane
over in Perth and I could detect no drawbacks compared to your
airplane Tracy. The difference is Ian is getting a lot more HP
than most 13B's as he is going 200 MPH with a not particular clean
nose dragger RV6A airplane or a  sophisticated intake system.

Paul Lamar

       Tracy,

         You know I am interested!

        Kelly Troyer

The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.  Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            
Copyright 1998-2002 All world wide rights reserved.