SUBARU in formula-1...?

hi all
if i remember well there was a Subaru project about formula-1 racing , way back in the 90's .
is it true ?
any details ...?

thanks
duby

The history of Subaru F1 project in general is as follows:

In autumn 1988, Carlo Chiti was invited by Fuji Heavy Industries in order to make up a F1 engine - in fact, it was researched and built by Chiti's Motori Moderni firm. A very unusual structure it was - 12-cylinder flat unit, with 5 valves per cylinder, very high speed (13000 rpm). But its power was insufficient (unlike Rolls Royce! ), and weight was excess. In 1990, these engines were installed on Coloni chassis. Gachot, the only Coloni driver in 1990, failed even to pre-qualify, driving the Subaru-powered car. In July 1990, Fuji gave up, and Subaru has never appeared in F1 since that time. Coloni ended the season with Cosworth DFR engines.

thanks

You can also have a look at:

http://www.thegaffer.../autos/1223.php

Our article on Coloni also covers the Subaru/Coloni partnership. The relevant bit:

But, plugging on into 1990, once again there seemed reason for optimism. Coloni was getting a multi-cylinder works engine! Japanese manufacturer Subaru was interested in following Honda and Yamaha into F1 as engine suppliers, and in 1989 had subcontracted Italian racing engine company Motori Moderni, run by Carlo Chiti, to build a 180-degree, boxer flat-12, 60-valve unit. Although the engine was originally intended for Minardi, Subaru eventually joined forces with Coloni, buying a half-share of the team. Subaru's president Yoshio Takaoka became the official head of the team, although Enzo Coloni remained his vice, and in truth it was still he and new team and business manager Alvise Morin who held the reins. Paul Burgess, formerly of Onyx, was hired as chief engineer, and the team increased it staff levels once more. Onyx and Rial refugee Bertrand Gachot was signed to drive as the team pared back to one car and returned to Goodyear tyres. A revision of the C3, dubbed the C3B, was painted in the red, white and green of Fuji, Subaru's parent company.

But from the beginning, the writing was on the wall. Boxer flat-12 engines had been used by Ferrari during their glory years in the mid-70s, and after that by Alfa Romeo in 1979-80. With a low centre of gravity, Chiti believed the engine would have aerodynamic advantages. Called the '1235', it was given its first shakedown in a revised Minardi at Misano in May 1989. Further testing in the dynamometer had registered an output of 417kW, and Chiti's target was 447kW, or 600bhp. By anyone's standards, this was a somewhat modest figure. Worse still, the engine, to be driven through a Minardi gearbox, weighed in at 159kg. Although this was only 10 kilograms more than the Ford Cosworth V8, when combined with all its accessories including its electronic engine management system courtesy of Magneti Marelli, the whole assembly was some 112kg overweight. Not only did this create a tremendous weight disadvantage, it made for a weight distribution nightmare, as all the additional bulk was towards the rear end. And, needless to say, it made the handling of the C3B anything but friendly.

The C3B was actually quite a different chassis to the C3, the changes mainly to accommodate the large motor. The airbox had been removed, replaced by two large air intake ducts on both side pods. Compared to the C3, the side pods were substantially higher, and reached further forward. But the car was barely ready in time for the first round of the 1990 season in Phoenix. The team only assembled the machine for a few laps' shakedown at the nearby Firebird track on the Thursday before pre-qualifying was due to begin the next morning. To no-one's surprise, the car could not complete single lap at Phoenix when a gear-change linkage in the cockpit broke, and was then a mammoth ten seconds off the pace in Brazil. It became apparent that the Coloni-Subaru package was never going to be remotely near the pre-qualifying pace, and indeed Gachot never managed to make it past Friday morning in the first half of the year, although the unpredictable handling led to some hairy moments, notably in Montreal where Bertrand had a wild spin into the gravel. It did not take long for this Italian-Japanese relationship to become strained.

Dissension was rife in the ranks. After Brazil, Morin had already left, almost as soon as he had arrived, having not seen eye to eye with Enzo Coloni himself. Rumours in the paddock suggested that Coloni was unwilling to pay his staff, or put the additional money that came from the Subaru collaboration into developing the car and engine. Work on the B12 engine was at a standstill. But obviously the bigger problem was over who really was in charge of the team, whether Coloni or Subaru had the right to call the shots. Clearly dissatisfied, Subaru decided to buy out the team. Allegedly, Coloni had signed the team over to Subaru, but refused to hand the team over. By the Canadian GP he was in Japan trying to thrash out a deal, with Vanderpleyn having been enticed back to look after the team in his absence. By now Burgess was also gone, apparently at Coloni's request. But then, in an about-face, Subaru decided to pull the plug altogether, announcing at the French GP that it would withdraw after the next event at Silverstone. From Germany onwards, Coloni would be back in full control, and would revert to a Ford DFR engine prepared by Langford and Peck.

Any corrections, please let me know!

I'm a bit confused here, wasn't the Subaru/Motori Moderni a flat-12, not a boxer?

My mistake My English is not very good, so I mixed up 'flat' and 'boxer' engines. Of course, Subaru 3512 was a boxer unit.

More here.

Originally posted by Alexey Rogachev
My mistake My English is not very good, so I mixed up 'flat' and 'boxer' engines. Of course, Subaru 3512 was a boxer unit.

Well, perhaps my English isn't so good either, but I was actually implying that it was a flat-12, not a boxer!

Please stop that blushing, Alexey , I'm still curious: Does anyone know for sure if it was a boxer or a flat-12???

Originally posted by fines

Well, perhaps my English isn't so good either, but I was actually implying that it was a flat-12, not a boxer!

No, definitely my English is worse! I thought flat was the English term to describe what the Italians know as boxer engine (180-degree "V")...

Alright, back to basics: a "flat", i.e. 180° V-engine is not the same as a boxer. Though both are of a 180° "Vee" design, opposing pistons on a boxer do not move on a common crank, but do reach TDC and BDC simultanously. Now what sort of engine was the Subaru/MM?

I would believe that the Motori Moderni design was flat-12, aren't "true" boxers are quite rare?

Anyway the "boxer" designation tend to be used a little carelessly among flat engines.

How about the Ferrari 512 Berlinetta Boxer engine, wasn't it also a flat-12 and not a boxer?

Originally posted by fines
Alright, back to basics: a "flat", i.e. 180° V-engine is not the same as a boxer. Though both are of a 180° "Vee" design, opposing pistons on a boxer do not move on a common crank, but do reach TDC and BDC simultanously. Now what sort of engine was the Subaru/MM?

Completely agree, Fines. And I should kick my ass (and the asses of some of my friends in California).

Maybe due to my Italian backgound (I mean, knowing the reason for the term "boxer") I used to insist in the "technicalities" between a 180 "V" and a boxer engine (I use quotes in 180 "V" as, since the banks are at 180 degree to each other, the engine is not v-shaped...).

However, after being continuously dismissed by my English-speaking friends of such ("noooo - we can it a flat engine in English, no matter how the pistons work. Boxer is just another word") I gave up... So, I now return to my previous thought: a flat engine is not a boxer is not a flat engine.

(I am sending links to your posting to three people - thanks for making that clear. Also, they are not Atlas members, what may explain why they said what they did!)

Originally posted by Rainer Nyberg
I would believe that the Motori Moderni design was flat-12, aren't "true" boxers are quite rare?

Anyway the "boxer" designation tend to be used a little carelessly among flat engines.

How about the Ferrari 512 Berlinetta Boxer engine, wasn't it also a flat-12 and not a boxer?

As Fines, Rainer, you nailed it: boxer engines are rare and the designation is employed without much criteria.

Boxer engines are rare as the added complexity and weight usually do not compensate the slightly better dynamic equilibrium (when compared to a flat 180).

I have heard before that the "fact" (*) that Ferrari itself would call the 512BB a boxer even if the engine was not truly a boxer (*) was reason enough to believe that the designation boxer "does not matter"... Well, it does (back to Fines' posting).

(*) None of my books on Ferrari cars has a cut view of a 512BB engine, so I have no idea if it was a flat-12 or a boxer.

Thanks to you both,


Muzza

There was a theory that Renault would have to revert to the airboxs on teh sides rather than one on top to provide power and cooling to the cylinders with their wide angled engine. They managed to get it done with a normal airbox.

The good news is that the Subaru performed so badly that it never qualified and therefore a lot of people don't remember it. If your going to fail, fail on Saturday and go home.

It was a pretty gutless engine from all outward apperances.

Of course if you haven't heard of Subaru you certainly haven't heard of Isuzu. They built a V12 (I think a V12) and shoved it in the back of a Lotus 102 (D?) and had a test. I think the engine was taken back to Japan and proabably is collecting dust somewhere today.

For those who have not seen it...

I believe that all flat engines with more than six cylinders are in fact 180deg V12s - they are cheaper to build because of the simpler crankshaft and can be tuned to high rpm, as their pistons aren't boxing air towards each other. The plus side to that is smoothness, as a real boxer doesn't suffer from any inherent vibration.

The Porsche and Subaru flat-4 and flat-6 engines are the only real boxer engines around now.

I am really confused after reading this thread complete-and I used to be a service manager for VW-Audi-Porsche! Just what the hell is the difference between a "Boxer" engine and any flat 4, 6, 8, 12?

Originally posted by David Birchall
I am really confused after reading this thread complete-and I used to be a service manager for VW-Audi-Porsche! Just what the hell is the difference between a "Boxer" engine and any flat 4, 6, 8, 12?

Hello, David,

The term "boxer" was - to the best of my knowledge - coined in Italy to explain the movement of opposite pistons in this sort of engine. Imagine a boxer (a fighter, not the dog!) warming up before checking up another fighter, knocking his own fists one against the other with the elbows opened outwards. That's how the pistons move in a boxer engine: they go "all the way in" and "all the way out" at the same time.

(by opposite pistons I mean two pistons that share the same axis of displacement - that means, pistons that are "aligned")

As Fines explained above, in a boxer engine opposite pistons reach top dead center (TDC) and bottom dead center (BDC) at the same time. Each of the strokes of opposite cilinders are simultaneous - they undergo each of the four strokes simultaneously (the two opposite cilinders in compression, the two opposite cilinders in explosion, and so forth).

[note: some boxer engines do have a time lag between opposite pistons, but grosso modo one can say that the strokes are simultaneous.]

To allow such a movement each of the cylinder banks (that means, each half of the engine) of a boxer engine has its own crankshaft; these two crankshafts are then connected to a main shaft.

On the other hand flat engines have a single crankshaft, so each of the strokes of opposite pistons are not simultaneous (when one is in compression the other one is "doing something else").

I continue to look for a cut view of a 512BB engine...

Cheers,


Muzza

[i]
The Porsche and Subaru flat-4 and flat-6 engines are the only real boxer engines around now. [/B]

i had alfa romeo , alfa-sud , couple of years agp with a "boxer" engine .

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
The Porsche and Subaru flat-4 and flat-6 engines are the only real boxer engines around now.

So this statement is incorrect?

Signed, Confused in Canada

Originally posted by soubriquet
Whether that counts as "around now" is moot.

But that's exactly what I meant by that - "now" as is "still currently being produced"...

Clear as mud so far chaps

If I understood correctly, the Boxer engine would have opposing pistons and a common combustion chamber? Ain't no way Enzo would have considered that for one of his engines

The only automotive engine I am aware of that operated like that was the Trojan (I think).

Still confused in Canada

No, not a common combustion chamber, the big ends are still in the middle. And it would be just a single crankshaft normally, I don't think I have ever heard of a boxer with two - doesn't really make sense. Hmm, let me try a little sketch:

o--I--o

   I__

	 I

  o--I--o



o--I__

	 I--o

  o--I

   I--o

The first would be the plane view of a flat-4, the second of a B4.

Oh, never mind...

Originally posted by fines
No, not a common combustion chamber, the big ends are still in the middle. And it would be just a single crankshaft normally, I don't think I have ever heard of a boxer with two - doesn't really make sense.

Fines, all boxer engines I have handled/touched had one crankshaft per bank.

(On the other hand... they were not car engines, but ship engines, and one was a - or is, as it still up and running - generator).

I am still searching for a bloody cut view of a 512BB engine.

Thanks Fines and Muzza, I knew I wasn't the only one not getting the point properly-I'm just pig headed enough to need it spelled out for me The thought of Ferrari building an engine like a Trojan is too much to bear!
I think there was a British tank engine that used the twin crank, opposing piston, common combustion chamber principle-from memory a 2 stroke diesel-I'm sure somebody here knows more....

I note that in several books the Ferrari 212 and 312 engines are referred to as "Boxer"-surely they are "Flat". Does Porsche get it right? Is the Boxster indeed a "Boxer"?

Signed, Comfortable in Canada

Well, it's about time another non-native English speaker joins the discussion... From what I gather in this discussion, in order to qualify as a boxer engine, an engine with 180° included angle between cylinder banks must have crankpins on different sides of crankshaft (in a straight line; again 180° between crankpins) for cylinders 'opposing' (horizontaly opposed engine) each other. Everything else, including presumably most common option (?) of those cylinders sharing the same crankpin is flat engine... I think I have gotten it right, but whether it is better explained is another question. :

Originally posted by Wolf
... I think I have gotten it right, but whether it is better explained is another question. :

Maybe this drawing explains:



"Stolen" from http://de.wikipedia....wiki/Boxermotor, the best explanation I have found so far, alas only in German

They also state, that Ferrari´s Testarossa "Boxer" isn´t a boxer at all, but a "flat"-V!


Others have already tried their luck, too:

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Boxer_engine

http://www.subaru.com.sg/dif/dif02.htm

http://www.bmw-motor...oxerengine.html

http://www.flat-6.ne...php/t-6767.html

And I´m surprised that so far nobody has mentioned the classic and probably most successful boxer engine, Porsche´s Volkswagen design

Could we next please have a sketch of a flat-head boxer 12-cylinder engine, svp?

All I know is that I remember a story in Autosprint about this Coloni-Subaru, when Gianni Morbidelli tested the car at Misano and later told me that it was a "horrid pile of junk".

T54

Originally posted by uechtel
Maybe this drawing explains:



"Stolen" from http://de.wikipedia....wiki/Boxermotor, the best explanation I have found so far, alas only in German

How the f*** then do cylinders #1 & 4 supply motion to that "crank"?

Fines- one's crankpin is directly above the crankshaft and other's directly below it (angle between crankpins is 120°, since 360°/3=120°).;) See the sketch in head-on projection below the top projection.

Yes, I think the drawer forgot a bearing between 1 and 4.

Originally posted by Wolf
Fines- one's crankpin is directly above the crankshaft and other's directly below it (angle between crankpins is 120°, since 360°/3=120°).;) See the sketch in head-on projection below the top projection.

Ah yes, I see And no bearing necessary, uechtel...

you see
this is what i like about TNF .
i only asked about SUBARU & formula-1 and look where we are now.
as i know , SUBARU are best known for their "boxer" engines .

duby

The first test of the Subaru was reported in Motoring News of June 1, 1989.

Minardi tries Subaru's new flat-12

Carlo Chiti's boxer 12, designed for Subaru, had its first outing at Misano recently, and lasted six and a half laps before reting hurt with a con-rod poking through the crankcase.

Pier-Luigi Martini was a the wheel of the hack Minardi M188 modified to take the wide engine, and said that it pulled well from 7000rpm and had good torque between 10,000 and 12,000. It worked reasonably well until the premature breakage, which is believed to have been the result of gudgeon pin failure.

"The engine will rev to 13,500rpm already," said spokesman Jamie Manca Graziadei, "and Piero didn't go over 11,200."

Testing will resume between Phoenix and Canada, Jamie adding: "We'll look for somone to run it. Barilla was going to but has a clashing commitment in Japan, so we'll probably look at Naspetti, Brancatelli or Morbidelli, somebody like that."

I had forgotten that Minardi had tested it.

Yes, they did. See here and look for the Minardi-Subaru M189 entry.