Originally posted by JeffYoung:
Jake, you got me digging into my rule book.

Found this:
ITCS D.1.p: All engine components not otherwise listed in these rules shall meet factory specifications for stock parts.

So, I do think if you have an identical part to a stock part, it is ok. Your thoughts?
Well, that IS intersting...and while it is theoretical in the case of rotor housings, I went looking...

To begin, lets start with some equilizing terminology. In a rotary, I submit that the side plates function as the head in a piston engine does, for it is here that the intake port (= to valves) exists. I also submit that the housing is equivilent to the cylinder/block. (And yes, I know that the exhaust port on a 12A and 13B lives in the housing...work with me here).

So with that I read the good book. The line you refer to contains the phrase "all engine components not otherwise mentioned...". So i went hunting for "Block" or "Housing" or "Head" or "Cylinder", as these items are pertinent.
Rule ITCS D.1.j states: "Engines may be bored to a maximun of .040 inch over standard bore size."

Boring (verb) an engine requires a cylinder bore (noun), and those are found either in blocks or as indivdual items, such as in a Porsche. And I submit that the housing would fall into that category, although boring a housing is impossible.

So, to my eye, I think it's a stretch to replace a housing with a non Mazda housing, even if one were to be found.

On the other hand, the language required me to make suppositions, and there we run into the intent issue. Am I reading the book and allowing the obvious intent to sway my opinion? It does not "mention" "housings" anywhere else. Hmmmm.....

Thoughts?

(And yes, this IS like discussing the number of angels or whatever on the head of a pin, cuz nobody but Mazda will ever make these things!)



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]