Paul Visk wrote: >> It would be interesting to see if there's a difference in cooling >> efficiency between the baffling and the plenums on the same engine. I talked >> to WW about the conversation we had about you and Joe H's had same engines >> and similar temperatures. WW said that Joe's baffle design could have been >> made more efficient. That is why you had similar numbers. I think with you >> changed over to plenums and have a good temperature comparison. It will >> finally put this to rest.<<
I already know the answer...Joe and I proved it many years ago..about 50F improvement with plenums, with identical engines, instrumentation, probe location, and on climbout side by side. It's funny that WW eschews instrumentation and hangs an alternator in front of the right side inlet (the hottest bank on my plane), and thinks Joe's cooling system may be inefficient. Troy Petteway put plenums on his VW-powered KR2 (years ago) and it yielded an immediate improvement in CHTs. My brief experience so far with this engine installation is that CHTs are directly proportional to throttle setting and climb rate...way more than N56ML. It's probably a combination of things, including drag and baffling. I'm going to have a serious baffling sealing session, and wait until the engine is broken in the pass judgment though. But like I said...I know the answer already, and will be prepared to prove it in this comparison. More on details of performance as the hours rack up. I did another one yesterday, with six more landings, and it looks like today will be good for another two hours or so! Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com website at http://www.N56ML.com -------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: ppaulvsk To: KR EMAIL BOARD ; Mark Langford Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 5:28 AM Subject: Re: 819JF Performance Paul Visk Belleville, Il 618 406 4705 Sent on the new Sprint Network from my Samsung Galaxy S?4.
