449er

My personal hope is that Chevrolet builds both a ME & a FE. Best of both worlds but economics may not allow that

ltomn

I don't know how any reasonable man could argue that. That would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. It simply does not make any sense at all for them to eliminate the front engine versions of a very successful vehicle. Adding a new mid engine configuration is simply evolution of the brand.

SBC_and_a_stick

They all can be improved the important bit is the relative performance advantage which has kept up through time.

Say tire tech is so good that it eclipses powertrain capability, then maybe front engine front drive is the king. But that's never been the case. I think rear engine AWD has always been the best at accelerating in a straight line because tire tech has always lagged. Mid engine rear drive has typically excelled on track given the balance of the chassis.

So I'd say overall FMR or FR or FF were never really winning designs ever. AWD with rear engine is still going to be the best at straight line stuff and rear drive with mid engine is still going to be the best on track. In either case the engine should be behind the driver.

We're very close to having AWD electric power eclipse all ICE setups for short exhibitions. I bet they'll put most batteries around the rear axle if they have a choice

torquetube

By "all the rage," I was of course referring to the mid-engine revolution in grand prix and sports car racing in the 1960s, which inspired a trend of mid-engined concept cars and far-out sports cars. Like the Mangusta and Miura you mentioned, or more to the point, the Corvette CERVs and Astros.

Everyone thought that was the future of sports cars, just as SSTs were going to be the future of air travel.

MitchAlsup

The diminutive and underpowered Cooper CLimax car from 1959 almost ran away with the series--all due to traction:: more traction to accelerate, more traction to decelerate, more traction to corner.

And how many did they sell of the CERVs ?

MitchAlsup

I have never liked how a FWD car feels at the steering wheel.

No, it has to do with traction, when accelerating in a straight line, the front tires on a AWD can still contribute forward thrust.

This is an argument FOR mid engined cars.

It is very close between ME-RD and RE-AWD. ME wins when the extra weight of the AWS system weights "too much" and RE AWD wins when it does not "weight too much". Today "too much" is in the neighborhood of 200 lbs.

We need to look at where the center of gravity is, and how much weight transfers under acceleration. So starting with a 43%-57% F-R static weight distribution and a 33%-66% F-R weight distribution at maximum acceleration, one would want the battery CoG to be twice as far from the front axle than from the rear axle. This is the position that maximizes total available traction.

ETA: It would be interesting to figure out what the ideal F and R tire sizes would be in this situation. My guess is something like 235 F and 295 rears would probably work.

SBC_and_a_stick

I was abstracting from feel to make the discussion simple, about ultimate ability of the powertrain format.

Of course but that wasn't the point. If you only have one axle connected to the powertrain and the tire tech is good enough you don't need to send power to the second axle. What would be the point of AWD? It would just lose power through high drivertrain losses and add weight to the car for no reason. AWD is here because we don't have sufficient tire tech. You can use a similar line of thought to argue FWD would be king over FR, FMR, MR given sufficient tire tech.

Tire tech has always lagged, that is the point.


Weight matters of course but it's not the main driver. The main driver is traction. In rally AWD is king because of limited traction. In 0-60 AWD is king due to limited traction. In the wet, snow, mud, sand awd is king due to limited traction. However, most road course action and drag strip action is done in ideal conditions and over longer distances which helps the rear drive cars prevail by virtue of the small weight advantage dominating the small traction disadvantage. Tire tech dominates weight comes in second. You can still be competitive in ideal road course conditions with AWD.

And then take into account breaking distances and start all over. Most high power FR cars like C7 Z06 are likely better off with nearly square 320/355 at least that was my preference. With the MR Atom with enough power I think 245/355 would be ideal.

elegant

RE: ME’s Tire Size

Agreed! Last week I researched a large number of current ME’s, with the exception of the big Lambo, many are exactly 235/295 F/R respectively — or within one size width different than that.

My swag for the ME Corvette will be just that (for the entry ME); then 245/305 for the “middle ME”; and 255/325’s for the 800+ HP ZORA (whenever it arrives).

torquetube

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

stevebz06

In all the racing series where cars are built strictly for that particular competition, if the rules allow for freedom in the placement of the engine (i.e.; not NASCAR, Transam, or Australian Supercar), the designers always end up with a mid-engine layout. You will not find a Formula 1, Indy Car, IMSA prototype, or any other dedicated purpose competition car designed with a front engine layout. Don Panoz tried it with a car that was nicknamed the Batmobile, but it was only marginally successful against other ME cars despite the fact that it was possibly the most radical of all the cars in the series with the driver basically sitting alongside the engine.

JerriVette

Although I believe rear mid engine would be my personal preference for the next gen corvette...

I will mention the Ferrari lineup used to offer the California and the 458 and then 488 models. Now I believe it's the much sleeker portifino.

INterestingly enough discounting the much lower price even with the same engine..the front engine 2 plus 2 does far outsell the rear mid engine Ferrari.

That's why in the seventh gen camaro I believe we will see a revolutionary design change away from the retro inspired sixth gen camaro.

The platform is spectacular...the styling is a bit over used.

I believe as the corvette goes mid engine and sells in the 30k unit range with three different models...

The seventh gen camaro will evolve in a revolutionary design language manner...

68roadster

If the plant expansion in Bowling Green is only to build Vettes, it seems that would guarantee 2 styles of the car with FE and ME built simultaneously. This would be more logical as biz plan to satisfy their customers.

elegant

The plan expansion is net of 250,000 square feet, and only that after the old paint shop (consisting of 250,000 sf) is decommissioned. Reason: a monster chuck of the new paint shop’s expanded size is the length of new paint ovens; each one of them is 120’ (compared to the old paint shop’s ovens being 40’ in length).

The Powertrain Build Center is expanding; that will take up part of that net, remaining 250,000 square feet. We do not yet know whether the PBC’s expansion is a tiny part of that expansion or a significant chunk of it???

Lots more for us to learn as to what will be done with the remaining “extra space,” but what is left (available for something new) after the above two described changes is far, far less than the 50% extra size of the new larger paint shop.

mirage2991

Porsche has no issue producing rear engine cars, with mid engine cars, with front engine cars and an SUV. So your hope is not far fetch, it's being done now. All GM has to do is execute it without loosing their behind...it's doable, and probably what's in the cards.

johnglenntwo

In order to race it they need it to be in production.

Corvettes haven't been winning best driver's car. A ME Ferrari brother has.

Technology has made a Hypo ME RWD more possible, even desirable.

car junkie

The mid engine Vette is about 20 years late, I blame the legions of Corvette curmudgeons for this.

Can't think of a better way to breath new life and excitement into what has become an old mans car.

rgregory

For those suggesting AWD I really think it is only worthwhile for someone that wants to drive their car in the snow. McLaren 570s are running the low 10s in the quarter mile without AWD, McLaren 720s are running into the 9s without AWD so if done right a car can hook up just fine even at 700hp. Just have to keep the weight low.

As I have stated previously in this thread I converted my car from AWD to 2WD and would never change it back. The only issue now is it doesn't go very good on the snow/ice, but it snows/ices in DFW like once every 3 years.

SBC_and_a_stick

If the Camaro goes FMR with transaxle isn't that basically a continuation of the old Corvette DNA? If one insists on the old school platform the Camaro might provide it.

TA Racer

lt4obsesses

This thought has been brought up before and pretty quickly dismissed, at least on here.

However, the point is very valid. The performance level of the Camaro has greatly increased with the last generation. The design is all sports car now, hard to call even the Camaro a muscle car today.

Now, for the "Corvette" enthusiast, this will be a non-option, at least for those that can afford to turn to Mercedes or Jaguar type of car. However, for many that just want a powerful driver with a trunk at an affordable price and easy to maintain, GM has made the Camaro a much more comfortable transition from Corvette.

If GM has been planning the move to mid engine for the Corvette for some time, one major step would be to upmarket the Camaro just for this scenario to retain some of those sales. I think it all started with the last gen Z/28 in an attempt to show the Camaro is more than just straight line muscle. The ZL1-1LE ran the ring in 7:16, I don't know what else they can do to drive home this point now.

Although, I still hold to the thought the mid engine car will be "a" Corvette, but not "the only" Corvette. There will be choice.