Three rotors are getting very expensive but that would be the best
    for the Viking.
    The problem is the FAA will not approve it until Mistral gets the
    300 HP 3 rotor certified
    any day now.


    You can also do it your self and save a couple of thou. I recommend
    P-port engines
    which up the HP with no penalty in weight or fuel burn per HP generated.

    Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.


The Viking will be an experimental I am using parts to build a new plane
from scratch. I also have one that I am flying though.

I will concentrate on the Cougar for now.

I looked all over and do not know the difference or what makes an engine
a P-Port.

Either of these? 13B RESI, or 13B DEI.

Dan


Read this Dan.
http://www.rotaryeng.net/intake.html

Also here is a video on p-ports.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKw72dZ2yc

Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.

Dan,
The PP is the way to go for the Rotary, the side ports are designed for
minimal overlap, but are somewhat restrictive. A PP will give a rough idle
as does some of the larger side ports but with a reduction box of 2.85:1 the
prop idle at 700 rpm is 2,00 engine rpm and above the rough idle issue.

The Renesis engine has a side exhaust to eliminate overlap entirely-
especially needed in the Hydrogen application. The side exhaust tends to
heat the oil more than the earlier models. The earlier models range from the
10A ( no longer produced) 12A ( parts are scarce as hen's teeth) 13B ( used
mostly) Renesis 13B ( used by some).

The Turbo rotors are low compression and you need that with turbo but their
no good with non-turbo. So unless considering turbo for your aircraft, you
would need to swap out the rotors of a turbo engine.

Most people running a Rotary are using Tracy Crook's PSRU and engine
management systems - he's an Electronics Engineer.
Hope that helps!?
George ( down under)



The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2007 All world wide rights reserved.