Mid-Engined Cars

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnBM01
  • 19 comments
  • 1,168 views
JohnBM01

JohnBM01

21 years!
In Memoriam
Messages
26,911
United States
Houston, Texas, USA
Messages
JMarine25
Mid-engined cars have much different physics and handling characteristics. And I decided to open this thread to open this thread to talk about mid-engined cars, mid-engine car physics, or anything related to mid-engine cars. Now be sure you know what you're talking about when you talk about mid-engine cars. If the engine is in front of the rear axle, it is a mid-engine car. If the engine is behind the rear axle, it is NOT mid-engined. Mid-engine cars include the Lotus Elise, Acura NSX, Lamborghini Diablo, Lotus Esprit, Toyota MR-S, and the Ford GT to name a few.

Okay, let's talk about mid-engined cars whether your contribution involves favorite cars or driving physics.
 
Originally posted by JohnBM01
If the engine is in front of the rear axle, it is a mid-engine car.
Click to expand...
not to be technical or anything but most cars have the engine infront of the rear axle:cool:
 
note i said most
 
Interesting fach that most enthusiasts don't know: RX-7s (and RX-8s) are actually MR, in the technical sense, although the engine is still in front of the cockpit. The engine is so compact that it's actually mounted entirely behind the front axle. In large part, this is where the RX-7 gets its 50/50 balance.
 
It's true. You can have front-mid, or rear-mid engined cars. Literally, mid-engined means the car has the engine between the axles, whether it's front-mid or rear-mid is determined by that passenger's position relative to the engine. Hence the Ferrari 550 is front-mid, and the 360 is rear-mid.

Interestingly, the Lamborghini Diablo is not mid-engined, since the engine sits over the rear axle.
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
It's true. You can have front-mid, or rear-mid engined cars. Literally, mid-engined means the car has the engine between the axles, whether it's front-mid or rear-mid is determined by that passenger's position relative to the engine. Hence the Ferrari 550 is front-mid, and the 360 is rear-mid.

Interestingly, the Lamborghini Diablo is not mid-engined, since the engine sits over the rear axle.
Click to expand...

Most modern TVR's are a front-mid layout and this arangement does seem to have grown in popularity (at least as a marketing point) in recent years.
 
By far the coolest MR car I've ever driven was an MR2 Turbo. That thing was so fun to drive it really made me want to get one. But then I had to put some bags in it. Lets just say its not the roomiest car in the world.

I really thinks that what turns people off from MR cars, the it no cargo room, let alone a backseat.
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
It's true. You can have front-mid, or rear-mid engined cars. Literally, mid-engined means the car has the engine between the axles, whether it's front-mid or rear-mid is determined by that passenger's position relative to the engine. Hence the Ferrari 550 is front-mid, and the 360 is rear-mid.

Interestingly, the Lamborghini Diablo is not mid-engined, since the engine sits over the rear axle.
Click to expand...


so then the diablo is an axle engined car?
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie

Interestingly, the Lamborghini Diablo is not mid-engined, since the engine sits over the rear axle.
Click to expand...

Well according to this pic the Diablos engine sits infront of the rear axle.
 

Attachments

  • diablo1.jpg
    diablo1.jpg
    70.5 KB · Views: 98
Changing the oil filter on the MR2 is a lot of work :p
 
Whether a mid-engine car is the Honda Beat, Mazda AZ-1, Ford GT40, or even the McLaren F1, these machines have the engine in the rear, so I think driving these machines will be a bit of challenge. Almost as much of a challenge as racing them. I think maybe since they are mid-engined, they may tend to slide out a little more. Would I consider them drifters? No way. It's just that the handling style between a front-engine and mid-engine car is very different from one another. Compare a Mazda RX-7 to a Lotus Elise in terms of handling styles. Now sure, the Elise isn't a 6-figure supercar, but the engine in front potentially means you tend to grip the road better. Mid-engine cars tend to be a little different. I think handling is better with mid-engined cars, but at the expense of trying to keep it straight. And especially if you have a powerful mid-engine car with 276 or more horsepower, you'll have to try to hold it all together.

I also think that mid-engine cars cost more to take care of, and not to mention that you carry stuff in the front of your car, rather than the traditional rear of the car (unless the Porsche Cayenne was built to challenge the Renault Espace F1. But then, Porsche would have to make an 800-850 hp van...). Anyhow, enough of my talk for now. Keep the mid-engine talk going, folks!
 
Originally posted by JohnBM01
Whether a mid-engine car is the Honda Beat, Mazda AZ-1, Ford GT40, or even the McLaren F1, these machines have the engine in the rear, so I think driving these machines will be a bit of challenge. Almost as much of a challenge as racing them. I think maybe since they are mid-engined, they may tend to slide out a little more. Would I consider them drifters? No way. It's just that the handling style between a front-engine and mid-engine car is very different from one another. Compare a Mazda RX-7 to a Lotus Elise in terms of handling styles. Now sure, the Elise isn't a 6-figure supercar, but the engine in front potentially means you tend to grip the road better. Mid-engine cars tend to be a little different. I think handling is better with mid-engined cars, but at the expense of trying to keep it straight. And especially if you have a powerful mid-engine car with 276 or more horsepower, you'll have to try to hold it all together.

I also think that mid-engine cars cost more to take care of, and not to mention that you carry stuff in the front of your car, rather than the traditional rear of the car (unless the Porsche Cayenne was built to challenge the Renault Espace F1. But then, Porsche would have to make an 800-850 hp van...). Anyhow, enough of my talk for now. Keep the mid-engine talk going, folks!
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter where the engine is.

It all boils down to weight distribution.
 
So, my Malaysian buddy, do you think the weight distribution good or bad based on some of the cars I mentioned above? Or what if a front-engined car was made into a mid-engine car? Would it help or hurt distribution?
 
Originally posted by JohnBM01
So, my Malaysian buddy, do you think the weight distribution good or bad based on some of the cars I mentioned above? Or what if a front-engined car was made into a mid-engine car? Would it help or hurt distribution?
Click to expand...


A front engined car made into a mid? Elise has very good handling.

As long as the weight distribution is or close to 50:50, handling would be neutral(providing the suspension setup, tyres...are up to it).

Some mid-engined cars are loose at the back because of the rear-biased weight distribution and the same goes to the front heavy understeerers.
 
Originally posted by JohnBM01

I also think that mid-engine cars cost more to take care of, and not to mention that you carry stuff in the front of your car, rather than the traditional rear of the car
Click to expand...

The Mk1 MR2 has two trunks, one in the front and one in the rear, the rear being the bigger of the two. It's not huge, but it's sufficient for daily driving.

As far as cost, the MR2 is just about the same mechanically as the Corolla, same engine and such, just put in the back of the car rather than the front. The only thing that's more difficult on the MR2 is changing the coolant, its cooling system is rather complicated with the radiator being in the front but the engine in the back. There's no reason that a mid engined car has to be expensive.
 
You're right. About the most inexpenive mid engine cars are the MR2 and the MR-S. Unless Honda beefs up its Japan-only Beat and releases it to America, then they are about the only expensive mid-engined cars I can think of, that are available in America. Maybe the design of these cars and what it takes to make them perform make them more expensive than others. For a little more money, if you want a mid-engine car, the Porsche Boxster isn't too expensive.
 
There's no reason that a mid engined car has to be expensive, the only reason there aren't more inexpensive mid engined cars is that there isn't a huge demand for them. In addition to the MR2 there was the Fiero and Fiat X1/9... Porsche 914s are pretty cheap now, but I doubt they were when new.

Anyway, my point is that there is no reason that it doesn't cost any more to build a mid engined car than any other type of car. It might just seem that way because as you get into really expensive exotics mid engined becomes much more popular, mostly because in an exotic practicality isn't anywhere near as important as performance.
 
Engine placement has more effect than just weight distribution over the wheels expressed as a two part ratio.

Having the heaviest part of the car in the centre makes a car spin faster and turn with more agility, and also harder to control on spins.

Much like a figure skater draws his/her arms in to increase rotation speed a car with the engine in the centre will rotate faster. This can be used to explain why pretty much all good drifting cars are FR and why MR cars seem so agile.

There are probably other things that result from engine placement too, its just a matter of thinking and listing.
 
Back