Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan
The benefits of a boxer engine giving a lower c.g. is usually somewhat overstated. They end up sitting quite high at the crank for exhaust clearance. This puts the engine's heavy bottom-end structure and crank, as well as the flywheel, clutch, and the front half of the transmission a good 2-3 inches higher vs. typical inline and V engines. I'd give the nod to a V-configuration for best low-c.g. potential, then flat, then upright inline, but I think there's not nearly as much in it as marketing suggests. Also, the flat FA20 in our cars sits *way* forward apparently for steering-shaft clearance, contributing to craptastic 55/45 weight distribution.
I would bet a low-mounted K-swap FT86 would have overall c.g. height close to stock (maybe 1/4" higher), while being ~100 lb. lighter (KPower's is 140 lb. lighter, supposedly "like vs. like") and with ~2-3% better F/R distribution.
I'd rather have ~2700 lb. Kswap with 52.5/47.5 weight distribution and (pessimistically) 18.5" c.g. height vs. 2800 lb. FA with 55/45 distribution and 18" c.g. height.
What would be interesting would be a low- and aft-mounted compact V4...
|
Not sure how the lower c.g. of a boxer engine is overstated, if twins managed to have one of the lowest numbers of the segment. How come that typical inline and V engines don't have better figures? I wouldn't trust much statements of tuners like
Kswap . These guys don't have the restrictions of a road based car, like being safe and not end up killing you in a front collision event. So, they can move transmission as far back as possible by simply ignoring crash zones and the like. I would never trust such engine swaps and the only way I would have one is if I had a race dedicated car that I could transport between race events using a trailer .