i need a MR car

  • Thread starter Thread starter hanker
  • 55 comments
  • 3,228 views
The thing I don't understand is did GT3 try and avoid the technicalities of REAR mounted engines? I mean how they threw rear mounted cars into the Mid mounted catagory..
 
i think its cuase the ctr2 is 4wd so there goes that
and the boxster is truly a mr car and not a rr car cause its engine is infront of the rear axle rarther than behind it
and the rgt is the only rr i can think of in the game... so y bother.... correct me if i am wrong about the rgt being the only rr....
 
Originally posted by miata13B
cheap and fast - MR2 GTS bottom line, inexpensive to get it running fast including the price of the car.

Well, since I drive an MR2 on a daily basis:

Mid-engine describes the condition when the engine is in the middle of the two axles. In this case, the new 350Z can almost be considered mig-engine. Overtime the definition of this has become distorted to basically mean "the engine's in the back". In reality, mid-engine was first used to describe a car with an engine between the axles. In the case of most "Mid-engine" cars, like the MR2, NSX or Fiero, it's Mid-engine, not rear-engine, because the bulk of the engine is located infront of the rear axle. If you ever look at an MR2, it could almost be considered completely REAR engined - the same goes for an NSX.

On the other hand, Rear-engine is when the engine is COMPLETELY behind the rear axle. Go figure. :). I can only think of one RR car in the game, and that's the RGT. It can be argued as mid-engine in real life is you get a pic of the engine bay (check out RUFs page), because some of the engine is infront of the rear-axle, however, most of the bulk weight of the engine is BEHIND the rear axle.

These rules don't just dictate GT classification, it's actually what car manufacturers use.


Back to the topic: The best mid-engine car for the dollar? MR2 GTS all the way. The MR-S, Opel Speedster and Lotus Elise are also pretty good for the money. All the other MR cars are pretty expensive.

Steve-o
 
Originally posted by Shinez
The thing I don't understand is did GT3 try and avoid the technicalities of REAR mounted engines? I mean how they threw rear mounted cars into the Mid mounted catagory..

Some examples??? :confused:
 
Hi, Syzim, and welcome to GTP! Nice car, and a good answer.

The only minor correction I have to make is that I believe the criteria for engine placement is centerline of engine relative to the axle centerlines. The Porsche Carrera chassis is indeed rear engine as you say, but not because the engine is completely aft of the rear axle. Just the centerline is.

You mention the 350Z. The new RX-8 is also actually a midengine car, because the engine CL is aft of the front suspension centerline.

Welcome aboard!
 
Ah, the RX-8, I wouldn't call it midengine exactly, more like some kinda freaky mechanical rotary machine that just begs to be shoved through your legs. If the chassis wasn't so sturdy and durable, I would feel uneasy having a small engine near my feet.

The rest of the engine right infront of the rear axle I don't mind.
 
thanks for the help everyone, looks like im going to have to win some more races before i can afford one though!
 
Originally posted by DODGE the VIPER
Wow, so the RX8 is MR!? :odd:

Technically... it's sketchy. Most of the engine is inbetween the two axles, so it could be called mid-engine, rear wheel drive... but since the engines not in the back, people probably won't go for that. The 350Z is also the same way.

Steve-o
 
:odd: I thought the engine had to be behind to driver for a car to be MR or RR... I never thought a car could be MR with the driver seated behind the engine :confused:
 
Mazda calls it a front midship design. (According to their site) The main part of the engine sits directly infront of the feet. A shaft of some sort connects to the rest of the engine that sits right infront of the rear axle. The engine is in the middle of the car, its just that only part of it's behind the driver.
 
MR just impolies that the bulk of engine weight is between the two axles... this means that you can have a front mid engine or rear mid engine layout ( i believe that the storm is also a fmr)
 
Someone should build an MF car...:D :lol:
 
Or an RF...now that would be weird...tail happy...
 
the only useful front drive situation is ff cuase that is the only way the trction on front tires can be maximzed and make the car economical ( as all ff cars a designed to be) MF would be so werid
 
The RF would be quite a tail happy little bugger though...
 
But that one is harder to get than an F1 (at least for me...) :p
 
I had only two F1s before I got my GT-One...:)
 
Originally posted by DODGE the VIPER
The RF would be quite a tail happy little bugger though...

the rf would not be a tail happy little bugger... most of hte weight is on the rear wheels... yet torque is not being applied anywhere but the front... therefor the back will have more grip than the front and understeer is your only ability without weight transfer and extremely hard breaking to relieve weight off rear tires... the front tires would definitely loose grip first as soon as acc was attempted... because of alot of increase in tire grip without a way to relieve them... this is probably y no one has ever built a mf or rf machine and have usually used a 4wd with these engine layouts and a need for rally ability...
 
Originally posted by LanEvo
it doesnt make it look lesser...its a merketing scheme. honda did it first, then the others caught on. In fact toyota is considering bringing Lexus to japan. It's all about selling cars...

I think it's very funny that the Japanese build a car that they can't pronounce; "Rexus" But it's for the American market, so it kinda makes sense. Now they want to bring it home?? Seriously, auto companies spend lots of $$ researching model names. I'm not being a total smart-a**!
BTW; The Ruf 3400 is a SWEET MR that I won. And worth every penny to upgrade.
 
Back