Jeff, can you update your program with the correct locations for
  the starter bolt holes using my original plate? That would help
 everyone.
  C. Smith

  You don't want to do that Craig. It is too easy to match drill with
  the starter you have. There are too many minor variations in Mazda
 rotary
  starters. They will all work but the exact geometry varies in subtle
  ways.
  They all look pretty much the same. I own three different types.
  Sometimes I have to measure them to tell the difference.

  Paul Lamar


 Paul

 the idea for the future would be a true plug and play installation.  Why
 could it not be possible to identify a starter of whatever year and
 model,  tell all to get this starter and forget hand drilling holes
 after you received the unit. doesn't your local parts shop carry such a
 starter?

 jeff

 Well like engines there are many variations and people usually get a
 starter
 when they get an engine. No telling what starter they may have. If you
 buy a
 new starter from a Mazda dealer they are big bucks indeed.

 Your motor plate will fit 13B's and 12A's dating back to 1970.

 I would not even know which starter is the most popular and or the
 cheapest. Different starters were used on manual and auto transmissions.
 I am sure the 12A starter for the 1st gen RX7 is widely
 made but how much longer will they be available? The car is already 20
 years
 old.

 It is much cheaper to buy a half inch or 12 mm center punch and drill
 two holes.


 Paul Lamar


 A Toyota Corolla starter maybe?  Or to stay Mazda (but with high
 production numbers), how about a "3," 323 or MX3?

 Matt

 Many of those would work when you drill your own mounting holes.

 Paul Lamar


  Paul,

 I'd also recommend leaving them undrilled to be match drilled to the
 starter.

 One thought is three sets of holes.  One pair of holes lined up
 at 10:00 clock, another pair at 12:00 O'clock, third at 2:00 O'clock.
 This would allow three different starter models to be used.

 Even match drilling install the first starter at 10:00 Clock,
 so it leaves room for another set of holes later.

 Tom

 P.S. My '72 RX2 had that top mounted starter.  Starter bushings
 were worn, starter remained engaged when the key was turned off.
 Popped open the hood, and ran around to see if I could pull a
 battery cable.  The "+" melted into the battery when I looked
 at it!  Split second later... BOOM!  Battery exploded, spraying
 me with battery acid as the top of the battery blew off.  Thankfully
 I wore glasses and my beard protected most of my face from the acid.
 Thirty years later I still remember moment of "what the heck..... BOOM".

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 Paul
take a peek at this jpeg, removing this material here saves a half a
pound. I have not done this yet but I can if you think it's OK.. overall
weight is 4.5 pounds, Tracy's over 8 pounds.

jeff

That is a great improvement Jeff. Go for it if it won't add too much to
the cost.

This is a huge weight savings over the scherts beam configuration.

BTW the static loads on the bushing are 180 pounds on the right bushing
and 120 pounds on the left bushing no prop torque. This assumes the wet engine
with PSRU, starter, prop and alternator weigh 300 pounds and the CG of the
combination is at the plate. Actually it will be several inches
behind the plate so this is a conservative estimate as more load will
be taken by the rear mount.

The 250 HP prop torque is 8400 inch pounds with 386 pounds down on the left
bushing and 386 pounds up on the right bushing.

Net load on the bushings with full engine power is 206 pounds up load on
the right bushing and 506 pounds down on the left bushing. Best if you use a
2002-13 bushing on the right side and a 2002-15 on the left side.
Left and right from the pilots point of view.

The asymmetric mount actually reduces the load on the right bushing
closest to the engine.

Check out http://www.rotaryeng.net/motor.html for more info.

Paul Lamar