>
>It is the case where the builder buys a 2nd gen 13B  (now at least 15
>years old) that I think an internal inspection or overhaul is called for
>unless you REALLY know the history of that particular engine .  It also
>goes without saying (Ahh! there is a silly assumption!) that you either
>have, get, or borrow the required expertise in order to do this successfully.


        As long as the walls and housings are not scored up, the seals
look good, the oil pressure is up to snuff, the compression is good, there
is no sludge in the pan, and there is no metal in the oil, there is not a
lot to go wrong internally (with a rotary) that will knock you out of the
sky. Am I mistaken about this?

        If I had a 3+ year old engine, I would not hesitate to tear it
down. However, I have an engine that is less than a year old. It is a horse
of a different color.

        I have absolutely no problem with rebuilding the engine if it is
needed. (I'd really enjoy doing a rebuild, actually.) I have the tools and
experience to do it. My experience says, however, that an engine that is
relatively new, and is not abused or worn out, tends to have a lower
failure rate than one that you have just rebuilt. There are parts that have
an "infant mortality" that fail in the first few hours of operation.
Gaskets slip out of position during assembly. That pesky key in the oil
pump. These sort of "minor" problems are well-know by folks that have
rebuilt a few engines.

        Bill Dube'