Re: -WOB- Ferrari engine (and the missing "smooth" engine) **Rob

["Rob Levinson" <always_coca-cola@xxxxxxx>]

 "Calvin Hare" <harem3@domain.elided> wrote:

>Subject: Re: -WOB- Ferrari engine
>
>Hans writes:
>>
>>I've always understood that that BB512 engine was built as a V12,
>>albeit with a 180 degree angle. That angle and the name of the car
>>(Berlinetta Boxer) cause people to think it's a flat..
>>
>*************************
>
>Huh?  I'm confused...where's the "V" in a 180 degree angle?
>
>Calvin
>'96 M3




    It's a new font - "Courier Flat"   ;-)

Interestingly enough, it was Ferrari's great flat-12 design that at first
was a great success in F1 due to low height that eventually made the motor
very UN-competitive... the width made the newest under-car wind-sculpting
devices impossible to implement.  The V8s and V6s could use the space on the
sides of their relatively narrow motors.

    On a related topic, as I follow this inherent-balance question, I wonder
why nobody has mentioned the rotary engine (PLEASE do not start another BS
anti-RX-7 thread).  It doesn't suffer nearly the same type of vibration
disorders that a reciprocating (piston) engine does.  Just spin, spin,
spin...

- - Rob Levinson
'85 535i Turbo "M30 Forever!"

------------------------------