Is anyone else on the fence due to the engine choice?
 

I'm sorely disappointed that they're not using something like the IS350's 3.5L V6 in this car... never mind that they're (likely?) putting a boxer engine in it.

I like the concept of the car, but the powertrain is pushing me away.

:laughabove::bellyroll::laughabove::bellyroll:

Then buy heavy ass IS350, simple as that.

A boxer 4 cylinder offers some significant advantages in a FR platform. It lowers the center of gravity due to the low height of the motor. And it moves the center of gravity back due to the short length of the motor. Flat fours are also inherently balanced on one plane (as opposed to both like an L6 or H6, but L4s are not naturally balanced at all). And if it is an EJ series motor, they are proven that they can make good power. More than most people will need in the F/T/R-86/S.

It's an excellent choice, despite not being from Toyota.

:clap::clap::clap:
Dimman, good job! teach newbie some lesson.

LOL ur sucha hillbilly (more cilinders and more cc equals more power yall) id take a 4cyl turbo or twin charged (which has been done to a EJ20 :D:D) any day over a V8... its a sports car not a tow truck
what dimman said, H4 is the most naturally balanced engine apart from a V12 or a really well designed I6 due to moment coupling and canceling. I4 suffers from a end-end rock..

in short no i am not on the fence as the engine is one of the reasons i love this car since i cannot afford a 22B, do not like 4door saloons and would not be seen dead in a Porsche. I would love a Baja converted super with a EJ20 - T or a meyers manx/towd but only for bush/bashing, not for street

The only way I want to see anything other than a 4 cyl in this car is if they can squeeze an EJ33 in there without completely destroying the balance:burnrubber: Not very likely to happen so most of us are going to pull every last bit of power out of whichever size 4 cyl we get:thumbup:

You mean EZ or EG engines? EG did do 3.3 L H6 engine (SVX). While EZ was 3L or 3.6L (Legacy & Tribeca).

:bow:

If this is the same "Conor" from the mr2 boards im gonna say hes not so newbish.

He may be expert in MR series and/or V6 engine... but sounds like newb on boxer engine to me. Of course, I stand to be correct. I'm no way near PhD or expert of boxer engine either, but stating that cuz of boxer engine chosen over IS350 v6 engine (2GR-FSE iirc) is lame excuse to hating this car.

i hope they develop a new engine that is not an EJ. nothing wrong with the EJ, but i want cylinder heads done by Yamaha.

This. I want.

No reason it can't be a new EJ. Subaru's been updating this thing continuously for over how many years now? Lots anyways... Heads aren't that big of a deal to change.

That would actually be pretty sick, EJ20Y (for Yamaha!). Spins up to 9k or something...

Subaru have been improving the EJ engine series for 21 yrs, but I do wanna see how how much improvement can be seen with Yamaha tuned EJ heads... at the same time, I'm worry how much tq gonna be lost.

:bow:

Excellently put. As an aside, Toyota is working on the heads, and adding their D4-S system, so I am thoroughly thrilled about the engine choice.

I said in some other threads before.. What it looks like is that it will have the brand new replacement for the EJ series engine since Its getting pretty old. New tech etc is taking over.
The new block is based of the EZ series of motor but as a 4 cylinder... Its lighter, smaller timing chain etc

Hmmm... Will Toyota be willing to risk a super-anticipated new vehicle launch with an unproven new engine? We will see...

They will just prove it is all. :)

Modern Engine
 

2011 Ford Explorer SUV

Explorer's available advanced 2.0-liter EcoBoost I-4 delivers the power of a normally aspirated V6 without compromising four-cylinder fuel economy. Aimed at the SUV buyer whose top priority is fuel economy, this turbocharged and intercooled I-4 engine delivers a projected 237 horsepower at 5,500 rpm and 250 lb.-ft. of torque from 1,700 through 4,000 rpm. The EcoBoost employs direct injection of gasoline, Ti-VCT, direct-acting mechanical bucket (DAMB) valve lifters and four valves per cylinder.

there is no reason a new engine wouldnt work, even IF it was a fresh design. computers and CAE has come such a long way in the past few years alone that you can design a whole car and all components and their assembly (including engine assembly and gb etc) in a matter of months with a good team ofcourse and you can know with high lvl of confidence assurance it will work when creatd in real life

What exactly does this have to do with the thread?


Define unproven? On the contrary, why would they risk putting an archaic engine in the car? Car companies don't really give you cars hoping that you mod them and boost the crap out of them. Metallurgy has come a long way from the days of the 3S and JZ engines. Toyota does continue to build their engines with a wide margin for error.... the Aluminum metal matric block 2ZZs have been seeing up to 500hp. I wouldn't worry too much.

what the f are you guys talking about

:paddle:

whAT EVER'

LETS
:happyanim:

Unproven as in 'new'. A blank that no one knows anything about. Tuners have to start from zero, parts manufacturers have to start from zero, that kind of thing. It makes for a bit of lag when it comes to improvements, getting parts or finding out the weak points (7M head gasket for example).

The EJ may have a long history but I don't think I would call it 'archaic' given all the changes that Subaru has made over the decades. It's been open deck, closed deck, semi-open deck (I even think iron and aluminum block at different times but don't quote me), DOHC, SOHC, NA, turbo, valve timing, Ichi could probably add to this...

Sorry, what I'm adding? You guys w bigger English is confusing me. You gotta translate it to Engrish. :bellyroll: You want me to list the EJ engine specs or the whole Subie boxer engine specs?

Put the joke on the side.

Let me start back from few ppl's comments

Which is base off EG... which was base off EJ (EJ22 iirc)... Mary-go-around?

sorry can you guys define me a 'archaic' engine? What makes the engine an 'archaic' and not?

ancient, old, prehistoric... got the picture?

All the many different things Subaru has done with the EJ series over the years. Come to think of it I left out installing sequential twin turbos on a 2.0L 4 cylinder. Maybe not all were good ideas...

It could be considered kaizen in action, what Subaru has done/is doing with the EJ.

The only thing the EZ30 and EG33 has incommon is they both flat 6s and used in Subarus.
The EZ30 was a complete new design at the time.

Its not archaic but I just think tech has improved and emmissons are getting even stricker. Every one is wanting timing chains better fuel eccommony etc.
It maybe easer and cheaper for them to build a complete new engine from scratch.

Subaru has had a good run out of their flat 4 engines
Well the EA series of engine had a production run of aprox 25years
The EJ has about 21 years so far.

All they need is a new head with some kind of dual VVTL-i or something and direct injection. EJ lives on for 5 more years...

Subaru has AVCS and AVLS, Doubt either will be present though. Toyota is working on the engine heads. They are implementing D4-S (direct injection).

Sorry, I should of been more specific when I wrote that. Yes, EZ30 & EG33 are some what different. BUT if you look at all the tech they used on EZ30, which came from EJ. While EG33's tech was from... EJ engine.

EJ22 add 2 more cylinders -> EG33
EJ20 add 2 more cylinders -> EZ30
EJ22 improved w tech -> EJ20 & EJ25

...Do you see the Mary-go-around? Or it was bad metaphor?

Mary-go-round works, at least it worked for me.

And in the scheme of things aren't all engines "archaic"? I'd say it really does come down to the technology advancements versus the engine designs. Engine design has been primarily unchanged for the last century with the significant changes being in materials and the afore-mentioned changes in tech (SOHC vs DOHC, timing chain > timing belt, push rods vs cam shafts etc. etc.).

I definitely don't know the full history of the changes, but the principle and primary design, as to say cylinder lay out and 4 stroke etc, has been standard for... I would have to guess a little over a century. Except for those guys at Mazda and their crazy Wankel.

If your in to hp out of the box this car is wrong for you, this car is mirrored over the old AE86 this car will be more on balance & cornering ability not 1/4 mile runs.

Most of the major EJ changes are done to the head(s). Basically what seems to have stayed the same with the EJ will have been its bore spacing and mounting points for engine to chassis and for transmission to engine, and the fact that is some kind of OHC. It has come in displacements ranging from 1.8L (maybe less in Japan or Europe?) to 2.5L, so there is no need for major changes to the bottom end for displacement changes. Fundamentally its a very solid starting point for whatever they want to do to this motor.

AVCS is cam phasing (VVT-i)? And AVLS is profile changing (VTEC)? Which systems are on which current motors?

Either way if it's NA it will at least have AVCS/VVT-i. That is pretty much required for a combination of any form of performance with good emissions.

As for profile changing, Toyota seems to have moved away from VVTL-i, (the Lift part anyways). Why is that? Cost? Or just not having a performance platform to bother putting it in?

iirc current ones are AVCS.

V-6 in an supposed 86 successor?

Leave.

lol thats what i was thinking, his in the wrong forum I'll direct him to the right one.

here

http://www.genesisowners.com/hyundai...esis-forum.php

http://www.the370z.com/

Retrds who don't know how and when to shift.

:word:

how´s the boxer engine compared to the 3s-ge?

if done right, a modern 2.0L will smoke a 3SGE, even the BEAMS. H4 or I4.

^
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...HkzZP0w1pJLS4=

Edit: damn it NESW20