FR: The engine is over the front wheels, but the tranny can be located in the rear of the vehicle. This allows for 50/50 weight distribution, which helps handling, but most of the weight is concentrated at the ends (poles) of the car. Because of this the more effort is required to make the car change course. This makes a FR configuration the most inherantly stable of the rear drive layouts, at the cost of some maneuverability.
MR: Again we have 50/50 weight distribution, but the mass is concentrated at the car's center. This means less effort is required to change the course of the car. This makes the car more nimble, at the cost of some twitchiness (sp?).
RR: We no longer have ideal weight distribution, as most of the weight is over the rear wheels. This is advantageous because it combines the main advantage of front drive (lots of weight over the drive wheels for traction) while avoiding the drawbacks of front drive (not enough grip to put down power and turn the car, weight transfer off of the drive wheels during acceleration). Those who drove the original VW Beetle know that the RR arrangement did work well for driving in snow. There is one major problem with the RR arrangement however, which limits its application severely. When in a steady state cornering situation, a RR car is fine, however if the driver does anything (and I mean anything) suddenly, like lifting off or flooring the gas or hitting the brakes, the driver is introduced to the laws of physics, if lucky, and to an oak tree if not lucky as the rear of the car spins around and overtakes the front. RR cars require great care when driven fast, which is why the layout is unpopular.
Zenmervolt
Facebook
Twitter