Go Back  CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion > C8 Corvette > C8 General Discussion
Reload this Page >

What's the REAL reason for a motor in the back???

C8 General Discussion The place to discuss the next generation of Corvette, be it mid-engine, Zora, or whatever form it may take.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

What's the REAL reason for a motor in the back???

 
Old 09-10-2018, 11:45 AM
  #41  
TBIRD57
CF Senior Member
 
TBIRD57's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,442
Liked 58 Times in 51 Posts
Default

imo need an awd option to move it even more
TBIRD57 is offline  
Old 09-10-2018, 11:56 AM
  #42  
range96
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,314
Liked 155 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Racer X View Post
When one gets to this kind of weight bias, one has to be very careful about lifting the car. More than a few Lotus Elises tried to fall off a lift backwards as people were not strictly following the lifting points, some succeeded
And trailer it to the track backwards.
range96 is offline  
Old 09-10-2018, 01:02 PM
  #43  
ByRiver
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2015
Location: St Louis Area IL
Posts: 1,755
Liked 103 Times in 84 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sin City View Post
Theoretically it's to put more weight on the rear axle and have the polar moment of inertia closer to the center of the car as it turns. This lets turning easier, quicker and more stable. Having less weight on the front axle also has benefits in steering control and feel.

One other benefit is the sound, which is pretty cool coming over your shoulder. Also the car interior runs cooler so you can save some weight on heat protection.

The downside is that they are more complicated, more expensive, require more cooling, a more complex exhaust system in a tighter package, and are more difficult to work on.
The polar moment in the center of the car is what I feel in my MR2 Spyder. You feel the car just rotates and turns on a dime when making 90 degree turns. With the sticky Yokohama tires, the car just changes direction without a sound from the tires. It only weighs 1970 lbs, so it is very nimble and quick, and a blast to drive. Most people replace the 1.8l motor with the 1.8l 180 HP motor from the Celica GTS. That's the same motor the Elise uses. That gets the 1700 Elise in the low 4's 0-60, and low 5's in the MR2. I always wanted an Elise, but I can't get both legs into the car. If the C8 gives you the same handling as the MR2, but with lots more power, it would be the most awesome car ever for the money. I kept my MR2 because it is so much fun to drive. And hearing the engine behind you with a tuned exhaust is like music to your ears. The only thing that will screw it up for me, is not having a manual transmission in the C8.
ByRiver is offline  
Old 09-10-2018, 01:40 PM
  #44  
GOC
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2017
Posts: 232
Liked 58 Times in 42 Posts
Default

The performance of the ME Corvette will definitely be better and I'm all for it. I think part of what OP means is even if the ME car does get better, it won't be so night and day that a normal driver on the streets can take advantage of. That is why many believe that there is a market for both the ME and the current front mid engine set up for a better daily driving experience with about 90-95% of the performance of the ME car.
GOC is offline  
The following users liked this post: GOC
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-10-2018, 02:05 PM
  #45  
Chrisrokc
CF Senior Member
 
Chrisrokc's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Posts: 1,455
Liked 60 Times in 25 Posts
Default

I was saying this in another thread. The C7 ZR1 is at its limits for traction. C5-C7 vehicles with 600whp all have traction issues when normal street tires are in use. I am just talking straight line, forget road racing.

Moving the engine to the rear and giving the vehicle a 45/55 split will improve traction on base to high horsepower models. This is a must when competitors are bumping the horsepower up in their AWD, RE or ME platforms. FE can’t keep up without AWD.
Chrisrokc is offline  
The following users liked this post: Chrisrokc
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-10-2018, 05:57 PM
  #46  
Bill Dearborn
Tech Contributor
 
Bill Dearborn's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte (formerly Endicott, NY) NC
Posts: 32,997
Liked 3,466 Times in 2,316 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Stew24 View Post
I've never driven a Lambo, Ferrari or Mclaren. My C7 GS handles like nothing I've ever experienced, and wonder how much better it can get? I assume, as do you ... having less weight over the wheels that steer makes it more nimble, but is that better? Nimble can be thought of as nervous, at times. If a motor in the back has all these positive virtues, it would seem you'd see it applied far more in the marketplace.
P.S., .. That video of the ME running at the Nurburgring didn't *appear* to be handling any faster than any other Vette or Camaro I've seen there.
I have instructed in several ME cars. Ferrari 458, Lambo Hurracan, and an Audi R8. Each of them seemed to perform very well in turns. Imagine a pivot point drilled right down the vertical center of the car. Each of these cars would pivot around that point much easier than my C7 Z06 would. Once the front wheels started the car turning in the rear would respond and the cars just seemed to pivot and go off the turn. The car just turns quicker and is ready to power off the corner sooner while the front engine car is still turning and isn't ready to power off the corner as it is pointed the wrong way.

Bill

Last edited by Bill Dearborn; 09-10-2018 at 05:57 PM.
Bill Dearborn is offline  
The following users liked this post: Bill Dearborn
bebezote (09-10-2018)
Old 09-10-2018, 06:24 PM
  #47  
bebezote
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2013
Posts: 653
Liked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Bill Dearborn View Post
I have instructed in several ME cars. Ferrari 458, Lambo Hurracan, and an Audi R8. Each of them seemed to perform very well in turns. Imagine a pivot point drilled right down the vertical center of the car. Each of these cars would pivot around that point much easier than my C7 Z06 would. Once the front wheels started the car turning in the rear would respond and the cars just seemed to pivot and go off the turn. The car just turns quicker and is ready to power off the corner sooner while the front engine car is still turning and isn't ready to power off the corner as it is pointed the wrong way.

Bill
hi Bill... could you PM me about your school? I'm a 1/4 mile maniac... but prolly get schooled by a 18 yo kid on a track... and dont want to learn on the job training..and wad up the car...lol..
bebezote is offline  
Old 09-10-2018, 07:19 PM
  #48  
The HACK
CF Senior Member
 
The HACK's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2018
Posts: 546
Liked 261 Times in 145 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Iker View Post
More weight saving
I'm not entire sure about that. Sure, the drive-shaft materials (torque tube in Corvette) isn't needed, saving "some" weight, but all the other requirements that's needed to put the engine behind the driver, such as additional piping for all the cooling, negate that weight saving. On top of it, the bracing necessary to install the engine behind the driver on the rear subframe means you wipe out ALL the weight savings of a rear mounted mid engine design vs. front mounted mid engine design.

Most of the super/über exotic cars with rear mounted ME are typically lighter because they're super/über exotics and use exotic materials for weight savings, because at that price people EXPECT a light, high performance car. Take the Ferrari 488 vs. 812 Superfast, for example. For having 4 more cylinders (V12 vs. V8) and more than 50% larger displacement (6.5L vs. 3.9L), the Superfast is only 100lbs heavier. Rear mounted mid engine vs. front mounted mid engine, and if you factor out the mass difference in engine displacement and cylinder count*, the Superfast (front mounted mid engine) is actually LIGHTER.

* NOTE: The only reference I can find of a direct, same period comparison of a V12 to a V8 was a mid 1990's Mercedes V12 vs. V8 (1997 5.8L V12 vs. their 3.9L V8) and the difference was well over 210 lbs.

I suspect, if Chevy uses the same basic engine design (LT1) for the base C8, the C8 is probably going to be about 100-200 lbs HEAVIER than the C7.
The HACK is offline  
The following users liked this post: The HACK
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-10-2018, 08:27 PM
  #49  
*C7*
CF Senior Member
 
*C7*'s Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,107
Liked 23 Times in 17 Posts
St. Jude Donor 05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17

Default

Originally Posted by 16/C7Z View Post
Imo, and from experience, FE rwd cars tend to be easier to drive at THEIR limits than an ME rwd car because the FE car's front weight bias keeps you the driver in check. ME cars and more so RE cars, dont make you feel that way until it's at the point of no return.. and only the best drivers can get it back because what you need to do is not instinctual lol.

there are going to be SO MANY C8s with repainted panels from the same guys going from FE to ME it isn't going to be funny. The stability control in the C8 is going to be so intrusive. Watch. And it will need to be.


insurance will be through roof as well. Nightmare coming. And I want it to succeed. Just a realist. .
Do not compare a modern rear mid engine car to an old rear engine car. (say 911). You are comparing apples to oranges. The rear mid engine C8 will not have handling issues and will handle much better than a C7 Z06 at the limit.
*C7* is offline  
Old 09-11-2018, 12:04 AM
  #50  
vetteman41960
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 2014
Posts: 446
Liked 354 Times in 179 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by *C7* View Post
Do not compare a modern rear mid engine car to an old rear engine car. (say 911). You are comparing apples to oranges. The rear mid engine C8 will not have handling issues and will handle much better than a C7 Z06 at the limit.
Bingo
OP If you have to ask why mid engine for the C8 just means you never driven a V8 powered mid engine car.

Drive a 458 and you have your answer as to why the switch from front mid to rear mid!!

Last edited by vetteman41960; 09-11-2018 at 01:57 AM.
vetteman41960 is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by vetteman41960:
bebezote (09-11-2018), Parcival (09-12-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 10:42 AM
  #51  
doctor_charly
CF Member
 
doctor_charly's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2015
Location: Paris
Posts: 52
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sin City View Post
Theoretically it's to put more weight on the rear axle and have the polar moment of inertia closer to the center of the car as it turns. This lets turning easier, quicker and more stable. Having less weight on the front axle also has benefits in steering control and feel.

One other benefit is the sound, which is pretty cool coming over your shoulder. Also the car interior runs cooler so you can save some weight on heat protection.

The downside is that they are more complicated, more expensive, require more cooling, a more complex exhaust system in a tighter package, and are more difficult to work on.

To me that's the truth...except if GM has found a way to make it "cheaper". For exemple : maybe they keep the exhaustif tubes of the C7 and they will stuff them on the side or on the roof like a truck
doctor_charly is online now  
Old 09-11-2018, 11:15 AM
  #52  
Vette_Pilot
CF Senior Member
 
Vette_Pilot's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2005
Location: Bonaire Ga.
Posts: 1,574
Liked 47 Times in 46 Posts
Default

Let's make sure they actually build it and then ask this question.
Vette_Pilot is offline  
The following users liked this post: Vette_Pilot
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 02:32 PM
  #53  
dfettero
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jan 2016
Posts: 498
Liked 65 Times in 52 Posts
Default Golf clubs up front

Originally Posted by Stew24 View Post

What's the REAL reason for putting the motor in the back of a Corvette? .. I mean, ... 99% of all other vehicles have the engine where it belongs, .. *In the front*! This just seems like some novelty at it's core, to me. I know the claims of better handling, ..but the current Vette handles SO awesomely, ... what more is needed? 51/49 front bias, as opposed to 51/49 rear bias, ... really??? The generated talk might gen up some addiional sales, .. so I guess so!
The real reason is so your golf clubs are up front and get to the course before you do!
dfettero is offline  
The following users liked this post: dfettero
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 02:40 PM
  #54  
Oneslackr
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Texas hill country
Posts: 1,128
Liked 126 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by PurpleLion View Post
You are asking NOW? Where have you been for the last 50 years?

I have been waiting for a mid engine Corvette since 1973 when the mid engine Wankel Corvette was supposed to come out!


You're one patient man.
Oneslackr is offline  
Old 09-11-2018, 03:19 PM
  #55  
bebezote
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2013
Posts: 653
Liked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dfettero View Post
the real reason is so your golf clubs are up front and get to the course before you do!

lol
bebezote is offline  
Old 09-11-2018, 04:27 PM
  #56  
MEJ
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Mar 2012
Posts: 371
Liked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Red08Roadster View Post
I've read the handling advantage of an ME car over an FE is analogous to a figure skater. When she's spinning and and her arms are extended she can only spin so fast but when she pulls her arms in her rate of spin increases. With extended arms the skater is like a front engine car with more weight distributed at the ends of the the axis, slowing the rate of turn. With tucked in arms the skater is like a mid-engine car with more weight centrally located increasing the rate of turn. Makes sense to me.
That was a fantastic analogy.
MEJ is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by MEJ:
bebezote (09-11-2018), PurpleLion (09-11-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 04:35 PM
  #57  
tobaccokid
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Feb 2009
Posts: 284
Liked 54 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Is this question meant as a joke ?

The reason 99% of vehicles are front engined is that it's a lot cheaper to produce, less complicated, and in case the writer didn't notice, only a tiny fraction of vehicle production are sports cars, so for them mid-engine has no relevance. Anyone who has ever driven a mid-engine car, even an older one like a Pantera, notices immediately that you can take a corner at a much higher speed. That is because more of the weight is centered in toward the middle of the vehicle allowing it to be rotated at faster rate than a vehicle with a heavy weight (the engine) placed away from the center of rotation.
tobaccokid is online now  
Old 09-11-2018, 06:32 PM
  #58  
range96
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,314
Liked 155 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by The HACK View Post
I'm not entire sure about that. Sure, the drive-shaft materials (torque tube in Corvette) isn't needed, saving "some" weight, but all the other requirements that's needed to put the engine behind the driver, such as additional piping for all the cooling, negate that weight saving. On top of it, the bracing necessary to install the engine behind the driver on the rear subframe means you wipe out ALL the weight savings of a rear mounted mid engine design vs. front mounted mid engine design.

Most of the super/über exotic cars with rear mounted ME are typically lighter because they're super/über exotics and use exotic materials for weight savings, because at that price people EXPECT a light, high performance car. Take the Ferrari 488 vs. 812 Superfast, for example. For having 4 more cylinders (V12 vs. V8) and more than 50% larger displacement (6.5L vs. 3.9L), the Superfast is only 100lbs heavier. Rear mounted mid engine vs. front mounted mid engine, and if you factor out the mass difference in engine displacement and cylinder count*, the Superfast (front mounted mid engine) is actually LIGHTER.

* NOTE: The only reference I can find of a direct, same period comparison of a V12 to a V8 was a mid 1990's Mercedes V12 vs. V8 (1997 5.8L V12 vs. their 3.9L V8) and the difference was well over 210 lbs.

I suspect, if Chevy uses the same basic engine design (LT1) for the base C8, the C8 is probably going to be about 100-200 lbs HEAVIER than the C7.
Sorry, I don't buy your analogy. A rear subframe would not be heavier than a front subframe for the engine. The lack of torque tube, drive shaft, and short exhaust should reduce weight by 100-200lb not increase it.
range96 is offline  
The following users liked this post: range96
ArmchairArchitect (09-11-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 08:07 PM
  #59  
ATC399
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
ATC399's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,971
Liked 39 Times in 34 Posts
Default

yep...I'm Jeff and I once owned a MR2..wow..I typed it...And it was a great handling under powered Mo'fo ..I was about to dump my 13Z for a 17GTR until I saw the video of the (hopefully) Vette ME at the ring...Now I just have to be patient
ATC399 is offline  
The following users liked this post: ATC399
bebezote (09-11-2018)
Old 09-11-2018, 09:12 PM
  #60  
MitchAlsup
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Aug 2000
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 2,922
Liked 121 Times in 84 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by The HACK View Post
I'm not entire sure about that. Sure, the drive-shaft materials (torque tube in Corvette) isn't needed, saving "some" weight, but all the other requirements that's needed to put the engine behind the driver, such as additional piping for all the cooling, negate that weight saving. On top of it, the bracing necessary to install the engine behind the driver on the rear subframe means you wipe out ALL the weight savings of a rear mounted mid engine design vs. front mounted mid engine design.
The Ferrari F355 (and 348) do not have plumbing that goes to the front, the water-air radiators are behind the side air scoops, as are the A/C cooler and the oil cooler. So it is NOT necessary to plumb a bunch of hot liquids to the front in order to cool them. Yes, they do plumb hot water to the cabin heater and the A/C lines to the cabin air control box, and even the PS pressure to the steering rack, but these are small thin pipes not the big ones used to cool the motor and other stuff back there.

The Ferrari 360 when to front radiators in order to ADD polar moment and slow the car YAW down to enable more novice drivers to drive the things without danger.

The C8 side vents are (ARE) big enough to cool an LT1 and transaxle, I don't know if they are big enough to cool a TT or supercharged engine.

Last edited by MitchAlsup; 09-11-2018 at 09:13 PM.
MitchAlsup is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: What's the REAL reason for a motor in the back???


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: