X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2496289 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:45:16 -0500 Received-SPF: softfail receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.102.122.149; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2007 14:44:38 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id lAJJicsM002924 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:44:38 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id lAJJiJxD007770 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:44:38 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:44:17 -0500 Received: from [64.102.38.175] ([64.102.38.175]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:44:17 -0500 Message-ID: <4741E793.3070408@nc.rr.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:44:19 -0500 From: Ernest Christley Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 16X Rotary Engine References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Nov 2007 19:44:17.0647 (UTC) FILETIME=[925BF7F0:01C82AE4] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.1181-5.000.1023-15554.002 X-TM-AS-Result: No--4.040300-8.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=echristley@nc.rr.com; dkim=neutral M Roberts wrote: > I do wonder about those other two bosses....... They look like simple mount points to me. Having moved the oil filter down and to the side, could Mazda be looking to reduce the height of the engine by moving some of the intake hardware over to the plug side of the engine? I think it likely, considering the concept car they're putting it in, and the fact that the core is slightly larger to accomodate the greater displacement volume. Maybe they'll also gift us with a stock intake that will be usable on airplanes.