What if - a new small capacity V12?

As long as the can keep the engines revving capability to a satisfactory level, I'm ok with larger displacements. It seems to me though that eventually the stroke is going to start getting too long, and the engines will not rev as freely. Obviously there is technology available to make small displacement motors make big power (F1), but I think reliability is an issue.

 

I read in a recent article that the V-10 was considered ideal by Audi/Lambo.
I think the computers came up with it.

It's certainly interesting to see the development of engines/displacement/cylinders over the years though.

 

I'm sure it was an American I'm quoting from the '60's

"Whichever way you cut it, there ain't no substitute for litres"

 

"There ain't no substitute for cubes" was the quote...meaning cubic inches. Although I think Ferrari hasn't ever followed that route to power.

A small V12 would be great I think, and would be a significant way for Ferrari to distinguish itself from it's competitors while at the same time returning to it's roots, and the principles of it's founder.

 

Reliability is the keyword.

 

Performance would go down the tubes. Also, the v-12 set-up is not cheap to make. People will have a choice between a $200k V-10 Lambo which is stupid fast, or a very quick and not nearly as fast modern Ferrari with a brilliant tiny v-12 engine that is also $200k. As an enthusiast, I would like the tiny v-12, but most of Ferrari's buyers want to be able to blow-away their buddies who have Lamborghini's and etc. Not gonna happen with a 3 or 4 liter v-12 unless the car is rediculously light.

 

Certainly in Europe, the Global Warming movement, and indeed legislation, is pushing manufacturers towards smaller engined and lighter weight cars.

 

don't forget maintenance costs

damn right. Also from a marketing point of view it's becoming more and more difficult to explain the need of a v12 to the ordinary european who only thinks about environmental protection (propaganda)

 

I think the current car styling is too aggressive and lacks grace or beauty. When combined with the huge power and huge size of for example the 599 the end result is a car I respect but not a car I love.

I would like some of the delicacy of the Dino & 250's back.

I would like to see the mid engined and GT cars MUCH lighter and MUCH smaller, with tiny V12's in the mid engined cars, and small V12's in the GT's. The cars should be beautiful.

This isn't an attack on the recent models. Ferrari is on a high in some ways; the cars are fabulous driver’s cars, and styling is certainly imposing.

I am not suggesting the cars go down market. They should be Jewel like cars where less is more. Beautifully constructed, engineered, styled and without electronic driver aids.

One other thing: Fioravanti is still in business, still making great concepts.

 

Granted a 3 liter V 12 is an expensive idea and wouldn't make the greatest power, but it would be a great engine for a smallish mid engined platform. Re-invent the Elise with a mid mounted V-12! Ferrari would likely have to do a limited run and would lose money on it, but it would get a lot of press and be the ultimate small track car.

Yes, we can dream. Never going to happen...

Ken

 

Not to be aggressive or argumentative, but I don't see Ferrari taking a new direction that holds much risk of losing money at this point. Not at a point when they are in such a strong position with escalating demand for exotic cars and a well regarded product offering attracting a serious premium. I wish I could find a way to replicate their business model!

 

Those small-displacement engines of the past (they had, I believe, 2 liter and even 1.5 liter sizes as well as the 3 litre) were born of the need for a high-speed racing engine to meet the racing rules of the day - late 40s, early 50s.
The 3-liter was kind of considered big by comparison, let alone the larger Superfast and Superamerica V12s.

Ferrari pretty much stuck to these small-displacement standards even up until the 1965 Lemans (where he won with a 3.3 litre car against the Ford 7+ litre pushrod engines).

After that, even Ferrari had to up the displacement (though not quite to the extremes of the American V8s).

I don't think anybody (I mean Porsche, Mercedes, the other Italians, etc) can really go back to 3-liter engines until the whole racing and production car environment changes radically. Remember the Mercedes attempt at a mid-90s "300SL" six? Great old name, too bad it weighed in at about 4300 lbs.

 

....I think in the future at least as amadeo felisa seems to indicate, turbos will be used, thus a twin turbo V8 etc is quite feasible...not so much for power, but rather for emissions/fuel economy.

 

Hi Martin,

It was Carroll Shelby, of Cobra fame, that is quoted with saying, "There is no replacement for displacement". It really depends on what you are trying to accomplish though.

Ciao...Paolo

 

And here I always thought it was little-known hot rodder Leroy "Flathead" McGurk who said "when in doubt, bore it out".

I think this is a wonderfully attractive idea, but I really don't want to trade in my 3.6 litre 993 Porsche for a present-day 2.0 litre 911 like I had in 1969. It gets better MPG, can go 50 mph faster, does not overheat, has full safety compliance, and THE AIR CONDITIONING ACTUALLY WORKS!

Probably even Ferrari would find the same engineering limitations...

 

Dont forget the 1.4 Rule.
If you breath on a 3 litre it will be considered equal to a 4.2 litre.
I say supercharge a 3 litre V 12, with 5 valves per cylinder.

now we are breathin!

 

"There is no replacement for cubic displacement"

Thats what the drag racers say, But I agree a 3 liter V12 would be so cool as long as it revs to 9000 rpms

 

Give it Twin turbo's or even go crazy give it 4!

 

Someone should put a 6L 10-rotor rotary engine in a car. With a rev limit of 10K. And twin turbocharge the thing. I can't even imagine the noise that would make.