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

[JC]

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

hehehe....I spelt it rite too

 

[KK]

I would think safety would play alittle on having the engine in the front versus the rear. Imagine a head on collision, if you have the weight of the vehicle in the back you will get squashed.

KK

 

[Zenmervolt]

Ferrari has never made a rear-engined car. They have made several mid-engined cars however.

Mid-engine, while best for achieving a 50/50 weight distribution encourages snap-oversteer. Since the car has very little mass concentrated at the ends, the tendency is to let go suddenly as opposed to gradually. Mid-engine designs are also terrible from an access point of view, and servicing a mid-engined car is a pain. Not only that, but the mid-engine design is horribly space-inefficient. You will notice that there are no 4 or 5 seat mid-engine cars. Also, a radiator for a liquid-cooled engine works best at the front of the car. With all the tubing required to run coolant back and forth to the radiator, you are introducing an extra potential failure point.

As for rear-engined car (of which only the Porsche 911 is both modern and prominent), while they do away with the space inefficiencies of a mid-engine design and increase polar inertia, they increase inertia at the wrong end. Rear-engined cars are susceptable to horriffic oversteer if anything sudden is done in mid corner. It has only been with 30+ years of constant engineering attention that Porsche has been able to moderate this problem (note that the problem has not been solved, only moderated). A rear engine needs even more coolant tubing than a mid-engined car. The best description for the 911 that I have ever see was thus, "A terrible idea, brilliently executed."

On any place except a race track and in any hands except those of a professional driver, understeer is the safest natural attitude for an automobile. Understeer is more predictable and less likely to send the driver into a spin.

ZV

 

[bonk102]

Originally posted by: Evadman
$

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Link to Tatra cars

Pretty interesting automobiles. Rear engine V8 sedans.

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: 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.

:Q

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Ferrari has never made a rear-engined car. They have made several mid-engined cars however.

Mid-engine, while best for achieving a 50/50 weight distribution encourages snap-oversteer. Since the car has very little mass concentrated at the ends, the tendency is to let go suddenly as opposed to gradually. Mid-engine designs are also terrible from an access point of view, and servicing a mid-engined car is a pain. Not only that, but the mid-engine design is horribly space-inefficient. You will notice that there are no 4 or 5 seat mid-engine cars. Also, a radiator for a liquid-cooled engine works best at the front of the car. With all the tubing required to run coolant back and forth to the radiator, you are introducing an extra potential failure point.

As for rear-engined car (of which only the Porsche 911 is both modern and prominent), while they do away with the space inefficiencies of a mid-engine design and increase polar inertia, they increase inertia at the wrong end. Rear-engined cars are susceptable to horriffic oversteer if anything sudden is done in mid corner. It has only been with 30+ years of constant engineering attention that Porsche has been able to moderate this problem (note that the problem has not been solved, only moderated). A rear engine needs even more coolant tubing than a mid-engined car. The best description for the 911 that I have ever see was thus, "A terrible idea, brilliently executed."

On any place except a race track and in any hands except those of a professional driver, understeer is the safest natural attitude for an automobile. Understeer is more predictable and less likely to send the driver into a spin.

ZV

Great post!... Although I think a front engine/rear-wheel drive car would be closer to having a 50/50 weight distribution most of the time. Mid engine cars have a low polar moment of inertia which makes it easier to make them rotate, and therefore easier for them to turn... but that's pretty much what you said.

 

[Howard]

Damn it boyRacer, you caught everything I wanted to say. Also, mid-engined cars tend to have a 40/60 weight distribution, with a lower polar moment of inertia.

Anyway, you can have the radiator inside a side scoop. They do that for F1, and a few Porsches do that with their intercoolers, I think.

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: boyRacer
Mid engine cars have a low polar moment of inertia which makes it easier to make them rotate, and therefore easier for them to turn... but that's pretty much what you said.

And easier for you to lose control of.

 

[0roo0roo]

rear is great is you have no rear seats its more mid rear then rear ib et.

 

[geno]

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?

You still have to mount the front suspension components and steering equipment as well.