Scott, the red prototype shown at Oshkosh in 2007 had a Subaru EJ22, not a Rotax. If you're among the very few still claiming the 914 is not a "standard aircraft engine," the world has left you behind. It's been years since I heard anyone claim that, with the exception of Continental and Lycoming sales reps. The idea that most pilots are more comfortable with Lycoming than Rotax is clearly debunked if you look in the only segment in which they compete. Rotax has sold many thousands of its 9xx-series engines. Lycoming has sold, what...maybe 20 or 30 IO-233s? Continental's O-200-D is cited as a major reason the Cessna 162 failed against its Rotax-powered rivals - too heavy, too expensive, too outdated.
The modified Lycoming IO-360 Jim's using has double the sea level takeoff horsepower of a Rotax 914, and the SCII needed (and has achieved) much better takeoff and climb performance than the eurogyros, and done it at a much higher gross weight. Rotax doesn't build anything comparable in power. If Bombardier/Rotax had continued development of their 200 HP (300 HP turbocharged) V6, that would have been really interesting vs Lycoming and Continental.