A Boxer Engine In A Class C??? Yes/No?

Back in the 90s I was driving a retired Chevy police interceptor with a de-tuned v8 LT1 Corvette engine. That sucker had roughly 600 miles range as well at 80mph

Not sure why the German Bombers thing is relevant today? Our SAC B-52 bombers can stay airborne for days on end, and a nuclear submarine can spend months parked under the ice pack before needing to resupply.

During WWII, German bombers would go 6,000 miles to Brazil with these motors and at that time, no other airplane could achieve that! And remember the Gatling guns the North had in the Civil War, well the A-10 Warthog jet uses Gatling guns as did the attack Choppers in Viet Nam and present day military. Years ago I spoke about how gas Class A's would get bigger with heavier chassis, bigger motors, and transmissions like the Allison 1000 and that happened. As a matter of fact, Damon & Newmar have class A's (Gas) today that are almost 40' long and back then everyone thought I was nuts! Back in 1990 we owned a 3/4 ton Suburban that got 25 MPG on the highway cruising at 70 MPH. It was powered by a Gale Banks 6.2L TD, with 3.42 rear end, and the TH400 trans was mated to a Gear/Vendor transmission, thus reducing the engine speed by 20%. Neighbors thought I had a gas hog, but I could drive that Suburban 600 miles to N.J. and when I got there, still had a 1/4 tank of fuel left! Anyway, I'm very excited about the future and new engine technology for all of us campers!

I couldn't get the link to work at first, just was able to look at the video. Yep, Opposed Piston Engine (OPE). First built in Germany, apparently. Made famous by Fairbanks-Morse powering ships, locomotives, many other applications. We had them in the Coast Guard years ago. Retired WW2 Submarine Tenders became the backbone of the Ocean Station fleet. Had two propellers, two FM's on each shaft. They reversed by being stopped then cranked in reverse rotation. Lots of crankcase explosions. We'd dock with all four FM's on line hoping to have at least one running by completion of the maneuver. Great engines, just OLD by the time we got them. Up to 12 cylinders with 8.125" bore. That'd be 24 pistons, 35 pounds each.

Gordon, the company that you said will be a flop already has 10 customers and one is the U.S. Military, building this engine on a larger size for ARMY tanks. I can't wait for 2-3 years down the road when this particular engine is being sold by several car companies. Then, I'll go back and show you and all the naysayers your comments. Best wishes, Bagman.

This design is just a rehash of something old, being rehashed since the 40s? If it hasn't succeeded yet, why is 2018 going to be any different?

It's cute, it'll be forgotten in a few weeks. The company trying to sell it will disappear and the guys at the top will take their federal grant money and other VC and reinvest in something else.

If this engine succeeds, it may make everything else obsolete. It is very interesting, but what are we going to do if we can't change plugs anymore?:) Millions of spark plug sockets made useless. Most likely, if it gets perfected, it will be Toyota that does it before anyone else, or perhaps Honda.

Very interesting engine design. Some key points that I picked up watching the video- it's a 2 stroke engine, and the engineer alluded to high EGT at "light loads" to make use of EGR for high efficiency and low emissions. This makes me think that at it's current level of development there may be serious challenges at getting the engine to certify in a higher duty cycle application (like a motorhome). It also is not a true dual fuel engine, each model will be engineered to run on gas or diesel, but not either one. It is a compression ignition engine, but the gas engines will very likely have different compression ratios, injection timing and other design parameters than the diesel. I'll be watching this engine technology with great interest.

bagman wrote:
DrewE, So your saying a 2.7L Boxer style engine is bigger than a FORD 6.8 V-10?

I just made a measurement of my Subaru 3.6R Boxer engine.

32 inches wide
30 inches long
23 inches deep


4.6l ford double overhead cam

30 inches wide
28 inches long
29 7/8 inches deep

Ford engines

Overcoming established corporate engineering group think can be difficult.

It goes something like this.

What market advantages will we gain by spending billions of dollars reconfiguring our currently highly successful existing platform with older technology? Does anyone have any extra budget dollars, personnel, or spare time they would like to spend on this? Keep in mind, your head will be on the chopping block, as well as your professional career/future if it doesn't show any promise and turns out to be a loser. Any takers? . . . . . No? Well then, get back to work and just keep doing what you're doing. (pretend this never happened)

Chum lee

Technically it's an opposed-piston engine and not a boxer, it is also not even close to new technology and also not built by Ford.