OK- this is a three part question!

[Brucelee]

1-Who invented the world's first Boxer IC engine?

2-What year?

3-Who will be producing the world's first boxer turbo diesel engine and when?

Lets see who get this one right!

Good luck!

[CJ_Boxster]

1)Karl Benz
2)1896
3)Subaru Boxer Turbo Diesel engine next year at Geneva Motor Show


Now do I win something??? hopefully i dont win satisfaction...

[Brucelee]

Correct!!!!!!!!

Do you read gizmag also?

No prize, sorry! Just GLORY!!!!!!!!!

[Adam]

I didn't know Karl Benz invented the "pancake" motor!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

Correct!!!!!!!!

Do you read gizmag also?

No prize, sorry! Just GLORY!!!!!!!!!

Hi,

Naw, I bet he's just the fastest with a Search Engine - see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal-combustion_engine

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[CJ_Boxster]

I must admit, i did use wikipedia for questions 1 and 2. 3rd question i just typed the words First boxer turbo engine and copied the text from the #1 search result and paste it here.

[MNBoxster]

@CJ_Boxster,

That's OK, that's what the Internet is for - the Information Age...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Brucelee]

Its all good, that is how we learn.

BTW- if you haven't checked out gizmag, it is GREAT if you love technology of all kinds.

[z12358]

I was just thinking the other day... What are the pros/cons of a boxer engine vs a vertical move (standard) engine? I would think that horizontal movement would be less stable (less robust) and more prone to failure as you have gravity allways pulling the cylinders downwards and off their axis of movement. How does the boxer engine compensate against this pull? Ideally, one would want the cylinders moving perfectly up/down to avoid this gravitational bias.

Could this also be at the root of the RMS and/or IM shaft problems we've discussed here? Just a cummulative effect of the slight gravitational pull over millions of cylinder cycles. Just wondering...

Disclaimer: I know nothing about mechanical engineering, so my question may be very stupid.

Z.

[Cloudsurfer]

There are several inherent advantages to the boxer engine layout. One being they are more balanced, especially in flat 6 and flat 12 configurations. Of note, the only engines that are perfectly balanced without counterweights and/or balance shafts are the straight 6, V-12, flat 6 and flat 12. This makes for a smooth running engine without parasitic loss from counterweights and/or balance shafts whch also tends to minimize engine wear and promote durability (this trait can be somewhat questioned in Porsche flat 6 and Ferrari flat 12 motors, but Subaru does VERY well with this).

When you start factoring in the forcres than a reciprocating, internal combusion engine undergoes, the 1G of gravity pulling the engine and its internals downward is a very minscule percentage of the lods that combusion forces place on the engine internals. Also, keep in mind that gravity is pulling on every part of the car and engine in a linear, constant force.

The other main advantage has to do with the motor's mass in the car. By placing the bulk of the mass low in the car, it promotes a lower center of gravity, which helps chassis balance and handling.

It is unfortunate that we are still fighting with IM and RMS failures in these motors after so many years, not to mention what is supposed to be stellar German engineering, however as a group, these motors have proven to be very reliable.

Patrick

[Ronzi]

One of the characteristics of the boxer configuration is that it puts the mass of the engine very low in the chassis. Not that big a deal in a pickup truck, but in a sports car it can make a difference.

[z12358]

Originally Posted by bmwm750

When you start factoring in the forcres than a reciprocating, internal combusion engine undergoes, the 1G of gravity pulling the engine and its internals downward is a very minscule percentage of the lods that combusion forces place on the engine internals. Also, keep in mind that gravity is pulling on every part of the car and engine in a linear, constant force.

OK, pros are no counterbalancing and lower center of gravity. But I'm not quite convinced the 'con' should be waved off just like that. True, gravity pulls everything with a constant force but the most sensitive to it would be any pieces moving at a right angle to this force (like horizontally firing cylinders). There's nothing compensating for this pull. Combined with tight tolerances (cylinders almost touching the walls around them) this will cause stronger friction and rubbing on the bottom vs the top or the sides of the block walls. Over millions of cycles this has to have some cummulative effect. The only question is how large, I would think.

Z

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by z12358

OK, pros are no counterbalancing and lower center of gravity. But I'm not quite convinced the 'con' should be waved off just like that. True, gravity pulls everything with a constant force but the most sensitive to it would be any pieces moving at a right angle to this force (like horizontally firing cylinders). There's nothing compensating for this pull. Combined with tight tolerances (cylinders almost touching the walls around them) this will cause stronger friction and rubbing on the bottom vs the top or the sides of the block walls. Over millions of cycles this has to have some cummulative effect. The only question is how large, I would think.

Z

Funny thing is that I have not experienced the Boxer engines as exceptionally SMOOTH. They are powerful for sure but in my experience, a Lexus V8 and the BMW inline 6 seem to be otherwordly in the smooth dept.

[Brucelee]

BTW- the Boxer BMW MC engine is smooth but they may have balance shafts.