"Klaus Schmoll" (klausschmoll)
03/25/2014 at 18:29 • Filed to: None
0
8|
"Klaus Schmoll" (klausschmoll)
03/25/2014 at 18:29 • Filed to: None | 0
| 8 |
Well, Graverobber dropped some hints about that in today's NPOCP, seems like he wasn't reading tea leaves or being still hungover from last night. German magazine Der Spiegel released an article stating the same today. They concentrate on politics and fact checking and only do cars on the side. So if they release something like this there must be something to it. 2.0l turbocharged 4-banger in a "real" Porsche? Haven't we been there, done that, got the T-shirt, and moved on? Cars that were born with a VW engine, suffered from a lack of "street-cred" throughout almost all of their lifes and are only now getting the recognition they deserve.
When I heard this, I immediately thought that they were going to put VAG's notorious straight four 2.oh turbo mill that powers about anything that is supposed to be fast these days into it as well. But no! They are working on a V4! A 180 degree V4 to boot as well! And it's supposed to produce 350-400 hp.
Some people might ask, "Is that a boxer engine, then?" No, it isn't. I'll spare you the details and only leave this diagram here. It explains the difference between a boxer and a 180 degree V engine (even if it has two cylinders too many).
But still, it's a bespoke Porsche engine, not the whored-out Seat/Skoda/VW/Audi mill, which while being a good one at what it does, might cause another credibility disaster for Porsche. And you know how they are paying for this extravangancy? By selling a ton of these:
And if you say that a V4 will never produce the same aural treatment a flat six does, don't despair. They will still keep that for the sportier versions.
AMC/Renauledge
> Klaus Schmoll
03/25/2014 at 18:34 |
|
A 180-degree engine is a flat engine, not a V. The two banks would have to be in the shape of a V to be a V4.
So basically, Porsche isn't going back to the 924 style. They're going back to the original 356.
Textured Soy Protein
> Klaus Schmoll
03/25/2014 at 18:36 |
|
I don't care if a Porsche has a 4-banger, but then again I've always been a huge 944 Turbo fan.
This not-a-boxer-but-let's-call-it-a-boxer-anyway (this same discussion always comes up when someone starts talking about the old Ferrari flat 12 in the Berlinetta Boxer and Testarossa isn't really a boxer engine but a 180-degree V12) 4 cylinder could make some fun noises.
Hopefully they manage to make it sound different from the Subaru boxer (but is it really a boxer?) 4 thrrrrrrummmmm , but I actually kinda enjoy the thrum so that's not the worst thing in the world.
oldirtybootz
> Klaus Schmoll
03/25/2014 at 18:39 |
|
I'm sure it finds its way into everything but the 911 and 918. Seems like the perfect engine to differentiate the Macan, Cayenne, and Panamera from related Audi and Bentley models. I see it supplanting the V6 in their lineup.
|
Klaus Schmoll
> oldirtybootz
03/25/2014 at 18:58 |
|
I don't think the Macan/whatever engine bays were designed to accomodate something like this. Isn't the Macan even sitting on the Audi Q5 chassis that supports transverse mounted engines?
|
Klaus Schmoll
> AMC/Renauledge
03/25/2014 at 19:02 |
|
Well, the 924 was an inline 4, and the 356 was a true boxer, so they aren't going back to anything with this. But that's just semantics. I agree that calling an 180 degree engine a V engine is kind of wrong, but AFIK it is done to differentiate them from the boxer engines.
|
AMC/Renauledge
> Klaus Schmoll
03/25/2014 at 19:05 |
|
What about H4? Or horizontally-opposed? Or flat? All those work.
And was the original 356 engine a true boxer?
|
oldirtybootz
> Klaus Schmoll
03/25/2014 at 19:24 |
|
I believe they share a platform, though I've heard rumors of Porsche dumping the V6 for the next Panamera. Given the power output of this V4 it seemed reasonable.
Axial
> AMC/Renauledge
03/25/2014 at 21:18 |
|
H doesn't work. H-configuration has two sets of horizontally opposed cylinders, each with its own crank-shaft, mating into a single output shaft.
I don't know about you, but having two flat-2 engines mating to a single output doesn't sound like efficient use of space or material to me.