Talk:Ferrari flat-12 engine

Flat vs. Boxer

Recommend inserting clarifying language that established the difference between a boxer engine where each connecting rod has its own journal on the crankshaft, and opposing sets of pistons move in opposite directions, and a 180-degree flat engine where opposing sets of connecting rods share a journal like a V-engine, and corespondingly move together.

Section move proposal
I would like to propose that all text regarding flat-12 engines in Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine be moved into this article, Ferrari flat-12 engine. This includes the text currently under the heading Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine as well as the last sentence under Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine This move would involve dividing the current "Ferrari flat-12 engine" article into "Racing engines" and "Roadgoing engines" headings, with subheadings for each engine model/type. The Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine article would then be moved/retitled to Scuderia Ferrari V12 F1 engine. My reasons for this proposal are as follows: Please let me know your thoughts and suggestions. My motivation for this suggestion is a desire to expand this article as well as overall wiki coverage of Ferrari flat 12 engines, cars and related people. Prova MO  (talk)  18:55, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * While Ferrari flat-12 engines do inherit some aspects of design from the V12 engines, they are a distinct lineage of engine designs that both share a common history of technical development and have been discussed by various sources in a manner that treats them as distinct from the V12 engines. For example, Jonathan Thompson's book Boxer: The Ferrari Flat-12 Racing and GT Cars
 * IMO, the current title of "Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine" is confusing and overly wordy. I also believe the broader current situation of the inconsistent use of "180° V12" vs "flat-12" across multiple Ferrari-related articles is confusing to readers. I understand that this terminology is somewhat contentious among Ferrari fans and historians. I have seen efforts by various editors in various articles/talkpages to subsitute "180° V12" for "flat-12" and vice versa. My position (reflected in my previous edits to pages such as Ferrari Berlinetta Boxer and Ferrari 312T) is that "flat-12" should be preferentially used in all Wikipedia articles relating to these engines, with the term "180° V12" mentioned only with context as to why some sources prefer it and the technical/historical basis of this non-standard terminology. Otherwise, use of "180° V12" instead "flat-12" is just WP:Jargon and a distinction without a difference that can cause confusion in readers and editors alike. I'm prepared to support my argument here with a few sources if other editors disagree or would like clarification, but I didn't want to kick off the discussion by filling this talkpage with my entire "180° V12" vs "flat-12" treatise unless it's necessary!
 * There are several Ferrari flat-12 engines that do not currently have a good article where they can be discussed in the context of Ferrari engine design and history (instead of the context of individual car models). The current articles provide room for F1 flat-12 engines (in Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine) and roadgoing flat-12 engines (in Ferrari flat-12 engine), but no room for the closely related racing sports car engines. For example, the 212 E Montagna engine or the engines in the Ferrari 312 PB sports prototypes. An expanded Ferrari flat-12 engine seems like the most logical place for these engines and can facilitate increased coverage of the topic.


 * Support, I'm quite happy with that suggestion . I have no problems with that idea, I think it sounds really good actually, and that would benefit the article. So all good with me, you can go ahead with that one. Davism0703 (talk) 00:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support, makes sense. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 01:40, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support, sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine is currently mostly redundant anyhow, as most of the engines listed have standalone articles. Perhaps there should just be a listicle called Ferrari F1 engines and shorter entries for each one? Anyhow, I recommend that Prova MO consider a more thorough reorganization as I think he is eminently capable of doing so.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  01:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that Scuderia Ferrari 60°-180° V12/flat-12 F1 engine looks really confusing so any improving solution would be advisable.
 * However in my opinion it would be better to have separate articles for racing flat-12 engines (F1 and sports-prototypes) and roadgoing flat-12 engines. 212 E engine is closely related to the 512/1512 F1, while 312 PB engine is in the same family as the 312B / 312T single seaters. Roadgoing flat-12 are a totally different design, just sharing the configuration and nothing more. Scott DNA (talk) 22:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That's a reasonable suggestion and worth delving into further. There are definitely significant differences between, for example, roadgoing 365 GT4 BB engines and 312 B engines. For example, 4 main bearings for the 312 vs 7 for the 365, 4 valves per cyl. for the 312 and 2 for the 365, fuel injection for the 312 and carbs for the 365. All the sources I have on these engines recognize that the 365 GT4 BB engine was influenced by the roadgoing 365 GTB/4 Daytona V12 engine to a large degree. But, I believe "Roadgoing flat-12 are a totally different design" is a overstatement, as I have a couple sources stating that the 365 engine was derived at least in part from the 312 engine. For example:
 * "The 365 BB engine was derived from the F1 engine (type 001), designed by Forghieri, which had a capacity of 2.991.01cc and powered the 1970 Ferrari 312B. This 3.0-litre F1 engine was investigated by engineers Giuliano De Angelis and Angelo Bellei, who took many cues from it for the road car engine." Reggiani/Bluemel, Ferrari Engines Enthusiasts' Manual, pg 127
 * "Dr. de Angelis followed closely the design of the Formula One engine, but rather than its 3 litres he specified a capacity of 4.4 litres so that certain parts - most notably the pistons and connecting rods - from the 365 GTB3 Daytona V12 could be used." Nichols, Ferrari Berlinetta Boxer 365 & 512 Series, pg 21.
 * Other sources (such as Beehl's Ferrari Berlinetta Boxer: The Road and Race Legends or Nowak et al's article on the Boxer in Cavallino 22) deemphasize the design similarity between the 365 BB and F1 engines, although they do not discuss De Angelis' design process like the previously quoted articles. However, all sources in some way contextualize the origin/development of the 365 BB engine within the ongoing racing flat 12 program. So each of the aforementioned sources support a strong historical link between racing/road flat-12s, i.e. the existing circumstance of a racing program using flat-12s made the creation of a roadgoing flat-12 appealing and feasible. Furthermore, those specific sources that discuss the development of the engine in detail (Reggiani/Bluemel and Nichols quoted above) also describe a strong technical design link between the 312 race and 365 BB road engines.
 * Maybe a compromise would be to have both racing/road engines in one "Ferrari flat-12 engine" article but also creating red links to individual engine models so as to promote development of those articles? I'm not opposed to a future situation like Mr. Choppers described above, where these large articles discussing multiple engines shrink down to lists as individual engine articles become more developed. I'm also not dismissing your suggestion out of hand, because I truly don't know what the best solution is for these "list-like" articles about engines. I'm just not sure splitting this article into two road/race engines articles is the best way to represent the history, nor is it in line with how the sources I am familiar with treat the subject. I guess perhaps I also see value in making all the Ferrari flat-12 engines discoverable from one article, regardless of application? Prova MO   (talk)  16:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)