Probably the dumbest argument against a boxer engine in this car I've heard so far.

[ZC6BRZ]

Originally Posted by mangostick

Uh.. all engines have timing components up front. All belt driven OHC engines have the same issue.

The problem with flat 4s is that the timing component is down low. an FR car has it up high, and a FF has it usually aimed at a wheel well, so not all OHC belt driven engines have that issue.

[mangostick]

??? wut? ..

Dude they all wrap around the CRANK.. that's down low. .. there's no discernable difference in damage in a hard front end collision between a Inline engine and a boxer. Where did you hear of this?

Here are pics of a I4 engine






Here's a boxer engine



Now that ^ is an EJ25 series engine.. our FA motors have timing chains and are much better protected/compact out front. The only difference between the scoobie engine in the pic and the 2.3L ford engine pics above it is that I didn't re-install the timing covers on my engine.

Most front end impacts are rear-enders.. as in, the car doing the hitting takes it on the nose. Nose DOWN so the damage is usually above the crash support and shoving the radiator support and hood into the front of the engine. Which engine would be susceptible to damage up high?

I understand the point you're trying to make man but its a weak one. OEM's dont care much about repair costs, they care about production costs.

Originally Posted by Dake

Maybe it's because of my job, but I like having an airplane engine in my car.

LOL!!! but then wouldn't you probably be happier with a rotary? :P I love to bust on my RX7 friends about having a airplane engine in their cars.

dunno I've always had a love for engines in general.. all different engine types. Certain ones are just better at certain jobs and applications.

[Ingen]

Originally Posted by NOHOME

And even if it did add up to a measurable improvement in the CG, what are the practical implications for the average driver of this car?

depends. The average driver drives a camry or accord or some minivan. They've never used more than 1/2 throttle, or a clutch pedal. They think the 86 is fast and havent the foggiest idea what a cg even is, but are convonced that taking a freeway on ramp at more than 45 mph is a recipe for rollover in any car. They don't benefit, because they are ignorant and afraid of their vehicles.

We benefit. A lower cg, any distance lower, results in a shorter moment arm from roll center to cg for the cars weight to pivot around when cornering hard. This means we can use softer springs than something like a mustang while achieving better body control per spring rate, and consequently lower rates for a nicer ride. It also allows more latitude in damper selection, which is why the 86 handles like a beast but doesn't ride like a torture device. Lower cg also leads to less dive in braking, and the lowered cornering forces and spring rates also allow for thinner suspension components and less body reinforcement.

The downsides are a car where you need an engine crane to change plugs, and a skid plate to protect the BLOCK rather than the oil pan.

For performance folks? Not too much to pay. But you won't see joe everybody lining up for an frs, because not everyone drives hard enough to care.

Edit: that aside, saying the sound of an engine is a reason to avoid its use is ridiculous.

And manufactures use inline 4 most often because it is proven technology with little r&d investment required, and because they are narrow. Narrow engine mounted transverse allows more longitudinal space for the engineers. More cabin leg room, more room for bumper crumple zones. And less effort achieving both. You get your 5 star safety rating, consumer reports tells everyone shaq could go planking in the font seat of the car, and a million people buy one because they want an appliance for moving the,selves and not a sports car.

Sent from iPad via iTypo

[Dake]

Originally Posted by mangostick

LOL!!! but then wouldn't you probably be happier with a rotary? :P I love to bust on my RX7 friends about having a airplane engine in their cars.

dunno I've always had a love for engines in general.. all different engine types. Certain ones are just better at certain jobs and applications.

You mean radial?

Naw, many light aircraft use horizontally-opposed four cylinders manufactured by Lycoming or Continental.

But yeah, any type of engine offers some plusses and minusses over any other type. That's what makes it fun!

[mrlewistan]

Originally Posted by Dake

You mean radial?

Naw, many light aircraft use horizontally-opposed four cylinders manufactured by Lycoming or Continental.

But yeah, any type of engine offers some plusses and minusses over any other type. That's what makes it fun!

the wankel engine is a rotary. this is a radial:

[JW89225]

Originally Posted by edward

Anyone who says a boxer engine can't make nice (and refined) noises has clearly never been around Porsches. One of my coworkers has a 997.2 GT3 which makes a sweet, sweet racket.

The GT3 is probably the best sounding 911 there is, the normal 911 just sound so... normal. As for 4 cylinders I think I prefer the high revving metallic mechanical induction noise of inline 4 VTEC from Honda.

[zooki]

Originally Posted by mrlewistan

Personally I really like inline6 engines. Not the most powerful or efficient but my god they are pretty to look at. As for sound, my fave type is turbo diesel (edit v8 turbo diesel like in massive trucks). Love hearing those wind up

Totally off topic, but here's a buddy of mine's inline 6. Yea, he's sunk tons of money into it, but it sure is fun to watch!
http://www.mighty6.com/

[4agze]

its all preference personally I like a high pitch sound from a I6 or I4 with an open ITBs or sidedraft carbs, the boxer sound Tiff Needell calls it the drum roll its not bad. but for me the best sounding stock V6 is still the VQ35 from a nissan 350Z, sad the 370Z didnt have that same sound.

[scorcherjf]

As mentioned by others - the horizontal space the boxer engine takes up is quite a bit more than other engine configurations. It's a trade-off for the lower center of gravity.

One problem with the space it takes up is that you often get less room for the suspension components and end up having to settle with a simpler suspension design like macpherson strut (instead of a double-wishbone or multi-link). A lot of Porsches end up having struts in the rear because of the engine as well but lately their cars have actually grown in dimensions which allows them to work in a multi-link rear.

As for the sound... it's kind of like the rotary. Some love it, some hate it. Personally I don't find the boxer engine sound too great =\

[Whitigir]

Originally Posted by post_break

So I was listening to Neutral FM, their newest release that you can listen to here. One of the commenters said this little golden nugget.



Starts around 8:20. He compares the boxer to the wankel, and says that if boxers were so good why don't more people use them? I just thought this comment was so stupid I had to post it here and get some opinions as well.

I mean there is a reason why subaru only uses boxer engines, and then there is porsche.

Wut ? has this guy been living under a rock ? The only thing Mechanically is that Horizontal Opposed engine is harder on the Crank Shaft. That is why Porsche has more F6 than Subaru. The cost for more Cylinders on a Flat engine is Very Expensive to make reliable

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkp3Tp5CZBI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkp3Tp5CZBI[/ame]

[Whitigir]

Originally Posted by mrlewistan

the wankel engine is a rotary. this is a radial:

That Motorcycle could Fly if you was to put Blades in front of it instead of sealing the Crank shaft up to put in the front wheel there