Why would more power ruin the car??

[extrashaky]

Also:

Originally Posted by fatoni

Why didn't Porsche go on endlessly about cog?

Skip to 1:06. Center of gravity is the very first advantage they discuss of the advantages of using a boxer engine in the 911.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnGSuM2a8Ig"]Porsche Top 5: Advantages of the Porsche Boxer engine - YouTube[/ame]

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by fatoni

That's speculative and likely not true. That super wide engine isn't placed very low because it would occupy space that suspension and the steering rack (not sure) occupy. An inline or v configuration means it can be put in the car much lower. Why didn't Porsche go on endlessly about cog? Probably because the Cayman is closer to a gtr than a miata or other impressive cars (brz included)

Again, see my previous post. The CG of the engine matters less than the CG of the rest of the car. The boxer's highest point is lower than the highest point on any DOHC V or inline motor. That's a fact. This highest point plus 50mm determines the lowest possible hood position, which in turn determines the 10th to 90th percentile seating position, which affects how high the roof ,floor, and belt line are. Lowering the TOP of the motor lowers the WHOLE CAR. I don't give a damn about the CG of the motor, because that's only 400lbs and it's already pretty damn low. I care about the 2000+ lbs of car that now sits lower because of where the engine stops vertically.

Really tired of explaining this to people who are staying willfully ignorant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Again, see my previous post. The CG of the engine matters less than the CG of the rest of the car. The boxer's highest point is lower than the highest point on any DOHC V or inline motor. That's a fact. This highest point plus 50mm determines the lowest possible hood position, which in turn determines the 10th to 90th percentile seating position, which affects how high the roof ,floor, and belt line are. Lowering the TOP of the motor lowers the WHOLE CAR. I don't give a damn about the CG of the motor, because that's only 400lbs and it's already pretty damn low. I care about the 2000+ lbs of car that now sits lower because of where the engine stops vertically.

Really tired of explaining this to people who are staying willfully ignorant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I could just as well make up some bull like that. Ready? Where the crank is dictates where the transmission mounts to the engine which dictates where the shifter of which dictates seating position so raising the bottom of the motor raises the whole car. I don't know why you are so concerned with a 40lb roof but wrote off a 400lb engine and the 100+ lb transmission. If what you say is correct then why is the brz centered higher than a corvette or miata again?

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

Also:



Skip to 1:06. Center of gravity is the very first advantage they discuss of the advantages of using a boxer engine in the 911.

Notice how they show a race motor from the sixties and its outside of a car. I'm not trying to say there aren't pros to a boxer motor. I'm just saying that the evidence didn't really support the claim.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by fatoni

Notice how they show a race motor from the sixties and its outside of a car. I'm not trying to say there aren't pros to a boxer motor. I'm just saying that the evidence didn't really support the claim.

What I noticed was that you said Porsche didn't promote the boxer's contribution to the low center of gravity, when they most certainly did.

[nikitopo]

@extrashaky Very nice material. Thank you! While trying to stay on the subject, I'll comment the following.


In the slides they state that they aimed for a power-weight ratio under 6kg/PS. The issue is that this ratio was achieved ONLY in the racing and bare-bones models in Japan and a model In Europe which weighted around 1210 kg and lower (asuming that the output was really 200 PS). So, the ratio on these cars was under 6kg/PS. All the other models and especially in the North American market were much heavier and the ratio was in the range of 6.3 - 6.4kg/PS. So, this is a kind of "proof" that more (linear) power or weight reduction to stay in this ratio was actually desirable by the factory. In fact you can go even lower the 6kg/PS limit, by using better tire compound which increases mechanical grip. Only thing is that you cannot do this indefinitely. There are limits of how much mechanical grip you can get by better compound and after that you start ruining the characteristic of the car. Then you really need to go into better weight distribution as stated in the posted video at 2:32. It is also what Mr. Tada mentioned in his interview.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

What I noticed was that you said Porsche didn't promote the boxer's contribution to the low center of gravity, when they most certainly did.

I think a video, where they talk about the cog of an engine and not a car for a minute doesn't constitute going on endlessly about cog but we can have different opinions about that.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by fatoni

I think a video, where they talk about the cog of an engine and not a car for a minute doesn't constitute going on endlessly about cog but we can have different opinions about that.

I don't think Subaru goes on endlessly about it either. They market it, yes. But not all that aggressively. I had to dig down two layers on their current website to find that quote I posted a few pages back. The low COG/boxer connection is more part of their inherent brand image developed over the years... just like Porsche. I had never seen that Porsche video before going to look for it, but I knew I'd have no trouble finding it (or something like it), because, like Subaru, it's part of the heritage of the brand.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I don't think Subaru goes on endlessly about it either. They market it, yes. But not all that aggressively. I had to dig down two layers on their current website to find that quote I posted a few pages back. The low COG/boxer connection is more part of their inherent brand image developed over the years... just like Porsche. I had never seen that Porsche video before going to look for it, but I knew I'd have no trouble finding it (or something like it), because, like Subaru, it's part of the heritage of the brand.

You think there is an inherent image of low center of gravity with Subaru. I had the impression it was the opposite. What is the center of gravity for some of their other cars?

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by fatoni

You think there is an inherent image of low center of gravity with Subaru. I had the impression it was the opposite. What is the center of gravity for some of their other cars?

I don't know, because they don't go on endlessly about it.

I only know about this one because I'm an enthusiast for this particular car, enough that I can find the Japanese language marketing materials showing the COG diagrams.

As for the inherent image (without specific COG numbers), it gets mentioned in relation to their rally cars. It came up with regard to the SVX. I've even seen it mentioned with regard to the Brat. The word I see sometimes is "planted," and that word comes up in reviews of other Subaru cars. I believe I saw that in a review of the Legacy when I went looking for more info about it when they gave me one as a loaner during my engine swap.

[mrg666]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Again, see my previous post. The CG of the engine matters less than the CG of the rest of the car. The boxer's highest point is lower than the highest point on any DOHC V or inline motor. That's a fact. This highest point plus 50mm determines the lowest possible hood position, which in turn determines the 10th to 90th percentile seating position, which affects how high the roof ,floor, and belt line are. Lowering the TOP of the motor lowers the WHOLE CAR. I don't give a damn about the CG of the motor, because that's only 400lbs and it's already pretty damn low. I care about the 2000+ lbs of car that now sits lower because of where the engine stops vertically.

Really tired of explaining this to people who are staying willfully ignorant.

Nice explanation! I just want to add that shape of the boxer engine itself and its low mount position should be directly contributing to low COG as well. When the 400lb engine is mounted low, COG moves with it lower to ground. Similarly, Tesla cars have such low COG because of the flat battery pack placed under the car. Our pancake engine and its mount position have the similar effect in lowering COG.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by fatoni

I could just as well make up some bull like that. Ready? Where the crank is dictates where the transmission mounts to the engine which dictates where the shifter of which dictates seating position so raising the bottom of the motor raises the whole car. I don't know why you are so concerned with a 40lb roof but wrote off a 400lb engine and the 100+ lb transmission. If what you say is correct then why is the brz centered higher than a corvette or miata again?

JFC..

The shifter position isn't regulated by multiple international safety bodies. Hood clearance and sightlines are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[venturaII]

Yay - a 1 inch lower CoG for an engine assembly that weighs 100 pounds more than it should. Only an advertiser could spin that into an 'advantage'.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I don't think Subaru goes on endlessly about it either. They market it, yes. But not all that aggressively. I had to dig down two layers on their current website to find that quote I posted a few pages back. The low COG/boxer connection is more part of their inherent brand image developed over the years... just like Porsche. I had never seen that Porsche video before going to look for it, but I knew I'd have no trouble finding it (or something like it), because, like Subaru, it's part of the heritage of the brand.

Originally Posted by extrashaky

I don't know, because they don't go on endlessly about it.

I only know about this one because I'm an enthusiast for this particular car, enough that I can find the Japanese language marketing materials showing the COG diagrams.

As for the inherent image (without specific COG numbers), it gets mentioned in relation to their rally cars. It came up with regard to the SVX. I've even seen it mentioned with regard to the Brat. The word I see sometimes is "planted," and that word comes up in reviews of other Subaru cars. I believe I saw that in a review of the Legacy when I went looking for more info about it when they gave me one as a loaner during my engine swap.

its an inherent part of subaru but you dont know the center of gravity for anything other than the brz? doenst add up imo. planted is probably coming from the iconic awd.

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

JFC..

The shifter position isn't regulated by multiple international safety bodies you dumbass. Hood clearance and sightlines are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please dont resort to name calling. you can want to reduce cog by lowering a 60 lb roof, 180 lb driver and 8 lb hood. id take the 800 lbs of drive train. if what you were saying held any weight, i dont think the cayman would have such a high center of gravity, right? i mean, there is no engine in front so the hood can be as low as they want.