What's the REAL reason for a motor in the back???
09-10-2018, 11:56 AM
#42
Le Mans Master
09-10-2018, 01:02 PM
#43
Safety Car
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.
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.
09-10-2018, 01:40 PM
#44
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.
The following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-10-2018, 02:05 PM
#45
Drifting
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.
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.
The following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-10-2018, 05:57 PM
#46
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte, NC (formerly Endicott, NY)
Posts: 40,078
Received 8,918 Likes
on
5,327 Posts
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.
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.
Bill
Last edited by Bill Dearborn; 09-10-2018 at 05:57 PM.
The following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-10-2018)
09-10-2018, 06:24 PM
#47
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
Bill
09-10-2018, 07:19 PM
#48
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.
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 following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-10-2018, 08:27 PM
#49
Melting Slicks
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. .
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. .
09-11-2018, 12:04 AM
#50
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.
09-11-2018, 10:42 AM
#51
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.
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
The following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-11-2018, 02:32 PM
#53
Golf clubs up front
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 following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-11-2018, 03:19 PM
#55
09-11-2018, 04:27 PM
#56
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.
The following 2 users liked this post by MEJ:
bebezote (09-11-2018),
PurpleLion (09-11-2018)
09-11-2018, 04:35 PM
#57
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.
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.
09-11-2018, 06:32 PM
#58
Le Mans Master
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.
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 following users liked this post:
ArmchairArchitect (09-11-2018)
09-11-2018, 08:07 PM
#59
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
The following users liked this post:
bebezote (09-11-2018)
09-11-2018, 09:12 PM
#60
Le Mans Master
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 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.