Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.191; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au
Message-ID: <002201c5f870$6b338010$a3e3ecdc@george>
From: "george lendich" <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-862293@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Center line of Renesis
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 11:16:55 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> NOT to nitpick, but I suggest to keep measurments as they were designed.
> The Renesis being a Japanese piece of pride this would make (11 7/8"  =
> 301.625 mm) a very odd measure.
> Not having a Renesis ( or any other Rotary for that matter) available, I
> can't really stomp on it, but I doubt that the Mazda Engineers put a
measure
> like that in the engine. It is most likely something like 300 mm or 305
mm -
> worst case any full mm in between...... to get an odd measure in a place
> like this (reference line) is inviting trouble down the road....
> I understand your dislike of metric (the metric world has it even harder
> with standard...), but if you mix the 2 measuring systems it should occur
on
> a well defined line. In your case it would be the Conversion Concept
mount.
> Do yourself a favor and get a set of calipers in metric (or some that have
> both measurements on it).
>
> Thomas J.
> (living both systems....)

Thomas & Bill,
My sentiments exactly! however in this case it worked out a bloody odd size
in metric and I WAS using calipers ( in metric).
Now I grew-up with Imperial and still use it ( as well as metric) but Thomas
is correct in that this is a motor built in the metric system and we should
therefore use metric - all MY drawings are in metric, but even then there
are some odd seizings floating around, I can tell you!
You only have to look at the timing wheel to see that, and I can tell you I
like ( and look for) full millimetre sizes, but sometimes it just ain't the
case.
Don't ask me why!
George ( down under)