Subaru WRX Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Are inline 4's naturally balanced engines? I know the flat 4... or any horizontally opposed engine is naturally balanced at all rpms, as is the inline 6... I remember reading some article about it.

...inline 6's are smooth too, but they do require a counter balanced crankshaft... (im not sure if the Flat engines need that) I don't like V6's either... they aren't too smooth unless they have counter balancing shafts and stuff... too complicated for me.

Another thing is the flat 4's have an awesome sound... inline 6's have a good clean sound,... inline 4s... sound like they're gonna die... and V8's and V12's just rumble real nice.

EDIT: This is a portion of post from the DSM thread in WRX vs. the World.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,501 Posts
Inline fours (I4) are not inherently balanced like the flat-four (F4) is. In fact, I4s are the worst motors for noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH). These are most commonly taken care of with a counter-rotating balancing shaft that cancels harmonic inbalances. I wouldn't try to pump up a four-cylinder without a balancing shaft.

On the other hand, horizontally opposed (flat) engines are completely balanced by design. They are the smoothest engines PERIOD

-Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Well, considering a new Lancer Evo 7 runs 0-60 in 5.0 flat (according to some magazine) but it does the 1/4 in 12.5 thats faster than a ferrari F360 (12.8 in the same magazine)

Thats freakin fast.... I hope the STI is that fast.

I also think I would rather get the STI than the Evo b/c of the horizontally opposed engine... it seems as though it would be safer at higher rpms... especially b/c of the short stroke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
Advantages to a H4 Engine?

Hope this isn't a repeat, if so I am sorry. Why a Horizontally Opposed Engine? What are the advantages? If there are great advantages then why not see more Boxster-Style engines in other cars?

-- Rich

EDIT: Rich, I'm sure it's a repeat, but I can't find the thread either.
I split a DSM topic the went way off track and merged it with your question.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
785 Posts
Flat engines give better midrange punch in terms of power distribution. In the Suby's case, the center of gravity is lower as well. Boxers can be found of Subies, Porsches(which Subaru used to use as an advertisement-same config), various touring motorcycles, etc etc. Also, the boxer does not need counterbalancing on the crankshaft. There are various reasons why we don't see more boxers in my opinion, such include: the cost to have two separate heads as opposed to an inline, servicing is a little trickier just do to spacial arrangement, etc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,155 Posts
Yea, I suspect cost is the primary reason as that seems to govern just about everything. I do like that boxer engine, though!:cool: I think the lower center of gravity and no need for counterbalancing are huge benefits and, IMO, are well worth any cost difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,501 Posts
DannyM5,

All engines require "crankshaft balancers." These are the flat, round parts of the crank that are one each side on the connecting rods. They offset the momentum of the pistons as they move up and down.

You will notice that these are very small on the flat four compared to other engines. This is because of the horizonatlly opposed design and light weight rods and piston. These facotrs allow for a lighter crank which is very, very good. Anything that rotates in a power train should be light, and carries it's weight as close to the center of rotation as possible. Less torque will be required to accelerate a member with these characteristics.

-Jim
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top