why aren't most cars made with the engine in back?

[dpopiz]

it seems like there would be tons of advantages. but only ferraris and porsches and all those high-end performance cars are built like that. why?

 

[spanky]

those two examples u listed are exotic sports cars... maybe that has something to do with it?

 

[Evadman]

$

 

[N8Magic]

Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: N8Magic
Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

If the engine is in the back, the weight will be over the drive wheels ya doof

 

[Koing]

purely for the hight and the added luggage space it brings with the height.

Then you would have a much smaller boot at the front of the car as you have to be able to see the road to drive. So they can't make the boot that big as its going to be kind of shallow = less room.

But I take it, if you can afford a car of a Ferrari, porche etc calibre then I take it that boot space isn't going to worry you much. You probably have a few other cars to deal with that. The exotic car you have will have enough space for clothes and such.

Side note. Jay Kay bought the last Enzo no399 for about £430k!!!!!!!!!!! He da man!!!!!!!

 

[N8Magic]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: N8Magic
Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

If the engine is in the back, the weight will be over the drive wheels ya doof

True, but most cars are FWD nowadays.

For the common joe, a FWD car will be easier to drive.

 

[boyRacer]

Practicality and production costs.

 

[psy44]

My uncle's MR2 has a mid engine, its cool and cheap, those retail for like 25k.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Koing
purely for the hight and the added luggage space it brings with the height.

Then you would have a much smaller boot at the front of the car as you have to be able to see the road to drive. So they can't make the boot that big as its going to be kind of shallow = less room.

But I take it, if you can afford a car of a Ferrari, porche etc calibre then I take it that boot space isn't going to worry you much. You probably have a few other cars to deal with that. The exotic car you have will have enough space for clothes and such.

Side note. Jay Kay bought the last Enzo no399 for about £430k!!!!!!!!!!! He da man!!!!!!!

<--- envious... that guy has taste... and at least he isn't one of those snobs that doesn't know isht about his cars.

 

[N8Magic]

Originally posted by: psy44
My uncle's MR2 has a mid engine, its cool and cheap, those retail for like 25k.

It's cool and cheap... until it needs repairs.

MR2's cost a fortune to get serviced and are a bitch to work on if you do it yourself.

 

[d33pt]

Originally posted by: psy44
My uncle's MR2 has a mid engine, its cool and cheap, those retail for like 25k.

and it doesn't have a trunk

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: boyRacer

Originally posted by: Koing
purely for the hight and the added luggage space it brings with the height.

Then you would have a much smaller boot at the front of the car as you have to be able to see the road to drive. So they can't make the boot that big as its going to be kind of shallow = less room.

But I take it, if you can afford a car of a Ferrari, porche etc calibre then I take it that boot space isn't going to worry you much. You probably have a few other cars to deal with that. The exotic car you have will have enough space for clothes and such.

Side note. Jay Kay bought the last Enzo no399 for about £430k!!!!!!!!!!! He da man!!!!!!!

<--- envious... that guy has taste... and at least he isn't one of those snobs that doesn't know isht about his cars.

He also has a really cool hat

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: N8Magic
Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

If the engine is in the back, the weight will be over the drive wheels ya doof

If you notice, he said front-engine/FWD

Front wheel drive.

 

[JC]

Hmm....how about rear-engine with front wheel drive?

lol

 

[dpopiz]

some of you have said it would give you a smaller trunk, but I thought one of the advantages of a rear engine would actually be a *bigger* trunk because isn't the space for the engine in front quite a bit bigger than most rear trunks?

to address the other topic this thread now covers: jay kay used to be cool. now he's gotten swept up in the stupid american pop scene.

 

[Walleye]

you want the engine in front for traction on the front wheels, so that turning is easier.


otherwise, you could put the engine in back (VW style)... or you could put the engine in the middle, and put traction on all 4 wheels (lamborghini style).


the mid engine rear wheel drive cars are the best. the mid engine all wheel drive cars are the best at rally, i think.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

East European car manufacturer Tatra makes passenger cars with V8s in the back. That's right, full size rear engine RWD V8 cars.

Apparently they are a b!tch to handle. Very cool idea though.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: N8Magic
Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

If the engine is in the back, the weight will be over the drive wheels ya doof

If you notice, he said front-engine/FWD

Front wheel drive.

Oh, What was I thinking. I thought FWD meant Faster Wider Deeper. If you put the engine in the back, then the weight of the engine will stillbe over the drive wheels, just like in a FWD car, which will help traction in the winter. Well, unless we are talking about JC's rear engine front wheel drive car.

 

[GroundZero]

Originally posted by: dpopiz
it seems like there would be tons of advantages. but only ferraris and porsches and all those high-end performance cars are built like that. why?

because, rear/mid engine cars are good for sporst cars, but if you want the cheap economy car with lots of space then there go fwd.
show me a rear engine car that has shite for room in it?

 

[N8Magic]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: Marshallj

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: N8Magic
Cheaper to build a front-engine/FWD car than the others, not to mention the added weight increases traction to the drive wheels in the winter.

If the engine is in the back, the weight will be over the drive wheels ya doof

If you notice, he said front-engine/FWD

Front wheel drive.

Oh, What was I thinking. I thought FWD meant Faster Wider Deeper. If you put the engine in the back, then the weight of the engine will stillbe over the drive wheels, just like in a FWD car, which will help traction in the winter. Well, unless we are talking about JC's rear engine front wheel drive car.

What I was trying to say was that FWD cars will be easier to drive in the winter even if the RWD car has it's engine in the back.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: JC
Hmm....how about rear-engine with front wheel drive?

lol

That's the worst setup. Lack of traction during acceleration, engine/accessory weight on non-driven wheels, engine/accessory weight on non-turning wheels, less weight transfer during braking...

 

[JC]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: JC
Hmm....how about rear-engine with front wheel drive?

lol

That's the worst setup. Lack of traction during acceleration, engine/accessory weight on non-driven wheels, engine/accessory weight on non-turning wheels, less weight transfer during braking...

Umm....that's the 'lol '

I was being facetious, ya know....

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: N8Magic

What I was trying to say was that FWD cars will be easier to drive in the winter even if the RWD car has it's engine in the back.

I got that, but I don't think our friend did Technicly, pulling instead of pushing is better in low traction. but I would stil much rather have a RWD or 4x4

<edit>
wow, that was a mighty big word JC. +2 vocab!

 

[GroundZero]

Originally posted by: JC

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: JC
Hmm....how about rear-engine with front wheel drive?

lol

That's the worst setup. Lack of traction during acceleration, engine/accessory weight on non-driven wheels, engine/accessory weight on non-turning wheels, less weight transfer during braking...

Umm....that's the 'lol '

I was being facetious, ya know....