If the BRZ was an American car would you have bought it?

[sierra]

Originally Posted by DantKR

Yeah, but that was 50 years ago. Hell, I'm not even 50. And I'm pretty sure that's not relevant at all since they don't use them now :P

They're still using those engines today. Have a google.

[brzninja]

No, I only buy Subaru.

[DantKR]

Originally Posted by sierra

They're still using those engines today. Have a google.

This is all I found in wiki... which doesn't count because you know... Subaru:

1989–2011 Subaru EJ flat-4 (used in the Saab 9-2X)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s#Six-cylinder

Do a search for "flat"

[sierra]

Originally Posted by DantKR

This is all I found in wiki... which doesn't count because you know... Subaru:

1989–2011 Subaru EJ flat-4 (used in the Saab 9-2X)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s#Six-cylinder

Do a search for "flat"

Here on wikipedia they mention the Corvair engines in modified form are still being used in aircraft today.
They have the engine listed in your link, turbo version!
It was built for 10 years and was very advanced in it's day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair_engine

Given the engine's air-cooling, aircraft amateur builders and small volume engine builders very quickly began a cottage industry of modifying Corvair engines for aircraft use, which continues to this day.[1]
The Corvair engine also became a favorite for installation into modified Volkswagens and Porsches, as well as dune buggies and homemade sports and race cars.[citation needed]

[DantKR]

Seriously? We're talking about a god damn car. Not a PLANE... Jesus really? No one cares about Frankenstein builds either. There is no PRODUCTION use of one.

[Admiral Ballsy]

Originally Posted by sierra

Let me guess?
Only niche vehicles need engines that are balanced by design and have a very low centre of gravity?
Those 2 factors are unique to boxer engines.

"Balanced" means different things to different people. Boxers are the only four-cylinders with perfect dynamic balance absent external aids. But since all currently produced I4s (at least over 1500cc or so) have balance shafts, it's a moot point. Lots of more-than-four cylinder engines are perfectly balanced - inline sixes, dual-plane V8s, all 12s.

I think more important than "balance" is "smoothness". Fours will never feel perfectly smooth since there's that instant every 180 degrees of crank rotation where there's no power stroke in progress. By contrast, V6s cannot be balanced without shafts, and AFAIK no currently-produced V6 has one. But if you drive a high-end V6 car, you'll find no evidence of vibration. A lot can be done with mount technology.

The low CG is only useful if you can actually do something with it. Flat engines are hard to package; they're very wide (the FA20 is wider than a typical 2.0L I4 is long). They realistically have to be oriented longitudinally, which makes same-end drive problematic; the engine either has to be moved far forward (or rearward, in the case of the 911), or it has to be raised to allow space under for driveline (Subaru AWD). Both of those create chassis balance issues, which kinda negates the potential low CoG of the engine assembly.

The only places where the flat engine can really be effectively used are opposite-axle drive (BRZ), or midships placement (Cayman/Boxster/Ferrari BB) - niche applications, these days.

So you've got an engine that's comparitavely expensive and complicated to produce (twice as many heads and sets of valvegear) complicated to package (intake and exhaust paths), almost certainly heavier than a comparable inline...and it's got very limited application where its advantages shine.

The boxer configuration is perfect for the BRZ and the Cayman/Boxster; beyond that, not so much.

Toyota/Honda/Nissan/GM/Ford/Chrysler/VW/FIAT are all much bigger than Subaru; if there was a compelling reason to use a flat architecture (outside of the niche applications with Porsche), I'd think at least one of those groups would be smart enough to do so.

[michaelahess]

Originally Posted by swift996

NO

No American car manufacturer would design something like the BRZ in philosophy. It would be a small coupe (think Ford Probe) with a 3.8L V6 with pushrods.

Oh how I miss my probes...

I'd buy if domestic, hell I just bought a Mustang right?

But only if the car was what it is today. I still much prefer my BRZ over the Mustang anyway.

It would be nice if it was assembled here, but no big deal. A large portion of domestic's aren't made here anyway, just assembled. People with bumper stickers that say "Prevent Socialism, buy a Ford" really piss me off for not knowing what they are talking about...We get a lot of that out here.

A buddy of mine was all happy when I bought my Dodge truck, "Awesome, made in America! Great choice!" till I told him it was made in Mexico with few domestic parts.

[86BRZ]

No.

1. If GM is going to this car, i.e. low Center of Gravity, boxer engine, rear wheel drive, etc. The car is NOT going to look or perform like it is today, so a NO.

2. If the current BRZ/GT86/FRS were to put on a Chevy, Ford logo front and rear? NO.

3. Perhaps a even better question: If the current BRZ/GT86/FRS were to put on a Chevy logo and adding 50 hp with a turbo, MSRP @ $23k?

Still NO.

All because it is come from AE86.

[DantKR]

Originally Posted by 86BRZ

No.

1. If GM is going to this car, i.e. low Center of Gravity, boxer engine, rear wheel drive, etc. The car is NOT going to look or perform like it is today, so a NO.

2. If the current BRZ/GT86/FRS were to put on a Chevy, Ford logo front and rear? NO.

3. Perhaps a even better question: If the current BRZ/GT86/FRS were to put on a Chevy logo and adding 50 hp with a turbo, MSRP @ $23k?

Still NO.

All because it is come from AE86.

The point is... If it was the exact same.

[lavisxice]

brzstang

[Nevermore]

I'm a bit of a noob about cars and the companies that build them. Also, I'm somewhat biased about makers because my dad works for Toyota and I've basically been brought up on their praise while being warned about others. That being said, take my opinion however you want.

From what I understand, the boxer engine is kind of a Subaru and Porsche thing, isn't it? I suppose, after skimming this thread and seeing it mentioned a couple of times, that American car makers have them too, but I've never really heard about them until now. I think that would be one of the biggest points. If they could get the engine right, maybe.

Also, I agree with a lot of the people who say that it's just too Japanese, even if that's a bit cliched. American car companies can make decent sports cars, but more recently they've been getting bigger and more powerful, with a few light ones thrown in at random. I don't think they could concieve the idea, or at least do it properly if they did. Doesn't seem to be their market anymore.

If they could build the exact car (FR-S or BRZ), I might say yes, but I think it's doubtful, so it's more a no. Also, if it had been built by an American company, I wouldn't even have an FR-S. I've only got one because my dad works for Toyota, but that's more financial than personal, though he probably wouldn't be too happy if I was driving an American car.

And for a fun little tidbit of information. He says that camry is more American made than, if I remember correctly, the ford focus. But don't quote me on that.

[DantKR]

Originally Posted by Nevermore

From what I understand, the boxer engine is kind of a Subaru and Porsche thing, isn't it? I suppose, after skimming this thread and seeing it mentioned a couple of times, that American car makers have them too, but I've never really heard about them until now. I think that would be one of the biggest points. If they could get the engine right, maybe.

You haven't heard about them because they haven't existed for 50 years. Again, Frankensteins and airplanes don't count.

[Admiral Ballsy]

He's right about content. The "most American" cars as far as content goes are the Camrys and Accords built here.

As far as other companies with flat engines...nobody else has them, because nobody else makes vehicles for which they're especially suited. If GM or Honda was going to tool up a new engine, they'd only do it if its development cost could be amortized over many units, and numerous fitments. Since boxers are by nature 'niche' engines, the economies of scale aren't there for them. So the Corvair engine is gone, VW doesn't use the Beetle engine anymore, etc.

[flippy]

Originally Posted by RRnold

Assembled in America=Yes

Designed in America=Hell no

THIS