Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.36; envelope-from=dale.r@cox.net
From: Dale Rogers <dale.r@cox.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] To Kelly Re: Mazda Factory O rings vs
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:28:34 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20050725002843.UINR17043.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net>

Leon,

   I don't have a dog in this fight, but let me share what I 
see as a practical benefit - as opposed to a theoretical one 
- of going to the TES outer O-ring.

   You wrote:
 
> I'm also curious as to just when and why would you be considering rebuilding your engine (so you can re-use the TES O rings). seeing that if an engine rebuild is done peroperly in the first place,  they seem to last for up to 20 years and 500,000 km if looked after ...

   I'm a relative newbie to the rotary world, so I'm 
building from a base that's pretty much all "book knowlege".  
Previous experience in other fields leads me to expect that 
I won't necessarily get it right the first time, and that I 
will probably have to tear it down and re-do the porting a 
time or two, before I get the 200 honest mustangs that Gary 
is building my prop for.

   I'm building on a shoestring (otherwise, I'd probably just pay the tab for a Turrentine engine.)  So the idea that 
I might be able to re-use those O-rings a few times is very 
attractive to me.  

   Beyond that, I couldn't agree with you more.

Regards,                     
Dale R.                              (___
COZY MkIV-R13B #1254          |----==(___)==----|     
Ch's 4, 5, 9, 16 & 23 in progress   o/ | \o