This whole topic sounds extremely interesting to me and my 912. So I am curious if the positive effect only occurs if the inner diameter is increased (throughout the whole balance tube length) or if it suffices to increase the volume of the balance tube. Does anyone have a more technical view on this ( I am only guessing)? Why not use the existing connectors and fit in a larger volume tube in between?
It would certainly reduce the effort to achieve the desired benefit. Has anyone tried this out yet?
Regards
Peter
Pacheco,
As I understand that balance tube improves the engine running without any issues that could harm it
So I would ask Roger, why it isn´t adopted by ROTAX as standard?
Sorry I don't have a good answer for you. The only one I can come up with is Rotax did their testing and all the research with instruments we don't have. They decided this was the best fit. Anything beyond that for technical info I can't really help.
Roger Lee LSRM-A & Rotax Instructor & Rotax IRC Tucson, AZ Ryan Airfield (KRYN) 520-349-7056 Cell
Just spend hours and days of trouble shooting, carb cleaning, syncronising to find my balance tube clogged !! New engine (140 hrs) . Never ran very smooth at low rpm . The inner half of the tube was damaged and clogged the balance tube. (Due to the use of pliers to syncronise) .
That's exactly why I have never used pliers or anything else to pinch the balance tube for syncronizing. I much prefer to separate the tube to hose joint and connect the gauges to these openings.
This website uses cookies to manage authentication, navigation, and other functions. By using our website, you agree that we can place these types of cookies on your device.
You have declined cookies. This decision can be reversed.
You have allowed cookies to be placed on your computer. This decision can be reversed.
Login
This website uses cookies to manage authentication, navigation, and other functions. By using our website, you agree that we can place these types of cookies on your device.
