No.
It's not a good design. In fact just by looking at the pictures, and I am also looking at an engineering diagram in NX right now, no. Not a very good design at all.
It looks like a boxer engine rolled inside out. Two crankshafts. Crankshafts are the heaviest parts of the kinetic portion of ICE. When you have two driven be different cylinder banks, the design necessitates either 1.) more cylinders or 2.) bigger cylinders to drive it with the equivalent force of two cylinders banks acting on a common crankshaft. I would think the opposed piston engine either was used only in very large engines, or was very inefficient, or both. Also, you are spreading the center of mass out wide. This would throw off the handling of the car and bank it twirl like a plank...instead of a pencil. The car would go great in a straight line, but go around a turn and the weight can overwhelm the tires. It would probably understeer its way to greatness.
But this is just my opinion. I haven't lived long enough to see and work with an opposed piston engine so I don't know how they work. It looks very complex and costly, and doesn't seem to provide any benefit. Maybe the boxer engine evolved from it, to make it more efficient to produce.
On a side note, I really want to like boxer engines but for some reason I cannot bring myself to like them. I have no clue why. Great design with balance in mind, but...haha oh well.
