Mintor Review

[Karl G. Mueller]

Thanks Dean.

Karl.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dean Pappas 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 3:41 PM
  Subject: RE: Mintor Review


  Karl's right.
      Dean
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Karl G. Mueller [mailto:kgamueller at rogers.com]
    Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 3:37 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: Mintor Review


    Steve,

    With proper exhaust port timing and setup with a good pipe you will
    loose that bet. My bet is that you will gain closer to 20% improvement
    in power, of course with more power comes a higher fuel consumption
    as well. Most engines are very conservatively ported in the exhaust
    timing to run on a muffler as well as on a pipe. Just an other compromise
    by the manufacturers.

    Karl G. Mueller
    kgamueller at rogers.com
         
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Patternrules at aol.com 
      To: discussion at nsrca.org 
      Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 9:49 AM
      Subject: Re: Mintor Review


      In a message dated 4/1/2004 9:28:50 AM US Eastern Standard Time, d.pappas at kodeos.com writes:
        Mintor 140 article, how does it run on a muffler as
        opposed to a pipe. I would expect some loss in power
        but also a loss in cost.
       I don't use pipes on any on mine engines Jeff Hughes and I have been using the Bolly 590r which is a muffler, no tuning head aches, no midrange problems, if you change props, fuel or anything else NON PROBLEMS, I have been running the Mintor 140 with it and it runs super, don't know how much less power you get from just running a muffler but I'd bet it's not over 5%, I use Coolpower 15% fuel.


      Steve Maxwell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040401/94d92296/attachment.html