MID ENGINE EXPLAINED by Car and Driver

[SheepDog]

Confused by the Mid-Engined Chevy C8 Corvette? Here's What "Mid-Engined" Means and Why It Matters


It will improve the Corvette's acceleration, braking, and handling. But it also sends a message to the world.
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/rover/profile_photos/7251299d-bf4f-4af0-b2ab-82c0a4a8dfea_1543376791.jpg?fill=1:1&resize=80:*[/IMG]
By ANDREW WENDLER
APR 16, 2019[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/2020-chevrolet-corvette-mid-engine-side-1-1555022011.jpg?crop=1xw:0.997029702970297xh;center ,top&resize=480:*[/IMG]
Chevrolet

Since its inception, the Chevrolet Corvette—in production form, at least—has never deviated from three core attributes: front engine, rear-wheel drive, fiberglass bodywork. From its 1953 debut with the Blue Flame inline six-cylinder to the thundering 755-hp 2019 Corvette ZR1, the basic formula has been set in stone.

That all changes now. Chevy is officially moving the engine to the middle, behind the passenger seats.

With this move, Chevrolet is shooting a flare into international waters, putting on notice the major players in the mid-engine-performance space including the Ferrari 488, Lamborghini Huracán, and Audi R8 as well as its crosstown rival, the Ford GT, and letting them know that the General can still cut and run when the accountants provide a long enough leash.

So what does "mid-engined" mean? Technically, it means that a car's engine is located in the middle of the vehicle, somewhere between the front and rear axles. But the typical location in a sports car or supercar is behind the driver and in front of the rear axle.
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/mid-engine-glossary-1555358676.jpg?crop=1.00xw:1.00xh;0,0&resize=480:*[/IMG]
Car and Driver

Engine placement matters for many reasons when it comes to high-performance cars, but mainly it's all about braking and handling. Shifting the engine rearward puts more weight on the rear axle, which means more rear-end traction and the ability to put down more power and accelerate more quickly. A mid-engine layout also improves braking, because the additional weight lets the rear brakes do more of the stopping. Mid-engined cars have a lower polar moment of inertia, which is a technical term that means that the mass of a mid-engined car is more centralized in the vehicle. This allows the car to change direction more easily and therefore more rapidly. (To experience this phenomenon, get someone to spin you in an office chair and compare the speed you feel with your legs fully extended versus tucked in.) The downside is that, should the rear end break loose and swing wide at speed, it's much harder for a novice driver to recover.

Aside from performance, a mid-engined car looks different because of not having to package an engine up front. It can have a much steeper hoodline and improved forward visibility. The proportions of a mid-engined car can give it an exotic look—but then, the short list of mid-engined vehicles is made up of one exceptional name after another.




It's not that GM hasn't kicked around the mid-engine layout before; the company's archives are filled with drawings and concepts utilizing the engine-behind-the-driver layout. But its realization in the 2020 Corvette validates the efforts and fulfills the promises made by in-house Corvette gurus such as Bill Mitchell, Larry Shinoda, Pete Brock, Zora Arkus-Duntov, and Tadge Juechter, both now and back in the day when automobiles were an agent of progress and the future seemed limitless. Critically, it also serves as a rolling indicator that GM still has a pulse and wishes to wring every last drop of potential and excitement from the automobile as we currently know it. In changing times, that's the kind of reassurance we need.

---------------------------------------

I did not get the complete article. XSheepDog

[MidEngine]

More of the same article.

Confused by the Mid-Engined Chevy C8 Corvette? Here's What "Mid-Engined" Means and Why It Matters

It will improve the Corvette's acceleration, braking, and handling. But it also sends a message to the world.
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/rover/profile_photos/7251299d-bf4f-4af0-b2ab-82c0a4a8dfea_1543376791.jpg?fill=1:1&resize=80:*[/IMG]
By ANDREW WENDLER
APR 16, 2019[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/2020-chevrolet-corvette-mid-engine-side-1-1555022011.jpg?crop=1xw:0.997029702970297xh;center ,top&resize=480:*[/IMG]
Chevrolet

Since its inception, the Chevrolet Corvette—in production form, at least—has never deviated from three core attributes: front engine, rear-wheel drive, fiberglass bodywork. From its 1953 debut with the Blue Flame inline six-cylinder to the thundering 755-hp 2019 Corvette ZR1, the basic formula has been set in stone.

That all changes now. Chevy is officially moving the engine to the middle, behind the passenger seats.

With this move, Chevrolet is shooting a flare into international waters, putting on notice the major players in the mid-engine-performance space including the Ferrari 488, Lamborghini Huracán, and Audi R8 as well as its crosstown rival, the Ford GT, and letting them know that the General can still cut and run when the accountants provide a long enough leash.

So what does "mid-engined" mean? Technically, it means that a car's engine is located in the middle of the vehicle, somewhere between the front and rear axles. But the typical location in a sports car or supercar is behind the driver and in front of the rear axle.

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/mid-engine-glossary-1555358676.jpg?crop=1.00xw:1.00xh;0,0&resize=480:*[/IMG]
Car and Driver

Engine placement matters for many reasons when it comes to high-performance cars, but mainly it's all about braking and handling. Shifting the engine rearward puts more weight on the rear axle, which means more rear-end traction and the ability to put down more power and accelerate more quickly. A mid-engine layout also improves braking, because the additional weight lets the rear brakes do more of the stopping. Mid-engined cars have a lower polar moment of inertia, which is a technical term that means that the mass of a mid-engined car is more centralized in the vehicle. This allows the car to change direction more easily and therefore more rapidly. (To experience this phenomenon, get someone to spin you in an office chair and compare the speed you feel with your legs fully extended versus tucked in.) The downside is that, should the rear end break loose and swing wide at speed, it's much harder for a novice driver to recover.

Aside from performance, a mid-engined car looks different because of not having to package an engine up front. It can have a much steeper hoodline and improved forward visibility. The proportions of a mid-engined car can give it an exotic look—but then, the short list of mid-engined vehicles is made up of one exceptional name after another.

It's not that GM hasn't kicked around the mid-engine layout before; the company's archives are filled with drawings and concepts utilizing the engine-behind-the-driver layout. But its realization in the 2020 Corvette validates the efforts and fulfills the promises made by in-house Corvette gurus such as Bill Mitchell, Larry Shinoda, Pete Brock, Zora Arkus-Duntov, and Tadge Juechter, both now and back in the day when automobiles were an agent of progress and the future seemed limitless. Critically, it also serves as a rolling indicator that GM still has a pulse and wishes to wring every last drop of potential and excitement from the automobile as we currently know it. In changing times, that's the kind of reassurance we need.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a2...hy-it-matters/

[SheepDog]

Front vs Mid vs Rear Engines – Which is Best?


Jul 28, 2016 ShareTweet


Which configuration is the best: front, mid or rear engines? As usual, things aren’t so clear-cut. Each configuration has characteristics that make it good for some applications, but bad for others, so let’s break it all down. Rear-Engines


Unless you’re on the racetrack, rear engine vehicles are kind of hard to come by. Reason being, these engine applications have a higher learning curve than other configurations.

But for race cars under the control of a professional driver, rear engines are great. They provide a lot of power and traction to the back wheels, which makes them quick to accelerate. Although, that same power to the back wheels can come back to bite them.

They are prone to oversteer – since the power and weight in the back wants to swing around to the front – but with the right suspension and chassis tuning, rear engine vehicles can be incredible sports cars. Just take a look at the Porsche 911.

Mid-Engines


Mid-engine is a funny term, because these engines are usually located in what we’d call the rear-mid position. Either way, many people will tell you that mid-engine cars are the best for handling, and for the most part they’re right.

By placing the engine in the middle of the car, engineers balance the front and rear weight and are able to maintain equal traction in all four wheels. This makes them incredibly stable in the corners.

There are a few drawbacks to a mid-engine vehicle, though. The first being the lack of cabin space. Typically, that mid-engine is located where one might want a back seat. Second, if you ever lose control of a mid-engine vehicle and start to spin, it will be harder to overcome and stop the spin due to its low center of gravity. Think of it like the difference between throwing a baseball and a baseball bat. The baseball’s center of gravity is compacted to the center, while a baseball bat’s is unbalanced, and spread out.

Front-Engines


We’d be willing to bet that 98% of vehicles on the road are front-engine. Why? For starters, most vehicles are front-wheel drive (FWD), so it makes sense to have the engine over the wheels that need traction. This makes the vehicle much more stable, and also helps maintain a relatively balanced weight distribution when accelerating. However, front-engine FWD cars are prone to understeer, because they lose traction when accelerating due to the car’s weight shifting to the rear wheels. This makes them somewhat undesirable for racing applications.

Rear-wheel drive (RWD) front engine cars are balanced better, though. Their weight is more evenly distributed, making them less prone to oversteer as compared to RWD rear-engine cars, and less prone to understeer as compared to FWD front-engine vehicles. The low center of gravity in a mid-engine vehicle still beats them out, though.

So which is the best?


Front-engine cars are generally the best for consumers. Rear-engine cars are unmatched in acceleration but can be hard to handle at times. And mid-engine cars are incredibly stable, but also have their fair share of drawbacks. So, all we can say is that they’re all the best in their own way. How’s that for a positive attitude?



Here’s a video update to our blog, “Front vs Mid vs Rear Engines – Which Is Best?”

FROM: LEITHCARS.COM

[SheepDog]

The Mid- vs. Rear-Engine Debate: Porsche Cayman R vs. 911 GT3

Location, Location. Two of Porsche's finest: one mid-engined, one rear-engined. Which handles better?

DON SHERMAN
JUN 21, 2011VIEW PHOTOS

JOHN ROE
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
From the July 2011 Issue of Car and Driver
This is where we venture beyond customary performance tests to decipher two of car enthusiasm’s enduring mysteries: Does spotting the engine in the optimum location—in the middle of the car—yield demonstrably better handling? And can engineering theory trounce painstaking practice?

Porsche’s 2012 Cayman R, the hottest mid-engined model in Porsche’s current lineup, represents the theory side of the equation. This is the thinking man’s sports car—light, stripped, and hunkered down for utmost agility. Aluminum door skins, a bare-bones interior, carbon-fiber seat structures, and new 19-inch wheels hold the curb weight to 3076 pounds. Air conditioning and audio-entertainment equipment are optional. Porsche’s 3.4-liter, direct-injection flat-six has been goaded to 330 horsepower at 7400 rpm, a 10-hp gain over the standard Cayman S. While price doesn’t count in this analysis, the Cayman R starts at $67,250, a pocket-warming $12,700 less than a base 911.



JOHN ROE


We tapped a 911 GT3—the proud son in an unbroken line of rear-engined Porsches dating back to 1948—to represent the practice-makes-perfect argument. What the GT3 lacks in value (as-tested price: $130,910), it overcomes with pure grit. In terms of power-to-weight ratio, this is the second-hottest naturally aspirated Porsche money can buy (after the GT3 RS). The 435-hp, 3.8-liter flat-six and the six-speed transaxle powering this 911 descend from battle-hardened race hardware. Prepped GT3s compete in the Porsche Supercup, a Formula 1 support series. Decades of exorcising handling gremlins that come with hanging a 570-pound engine behind the rear axle have paid off in razor-edged reflexes. The latest fix is a $1300 set of dynamic engine mounts that cinch up during aggressive maneuvers to calm the GT3’s transient behavior.

These road warriors are the ultimate examples of their respective 987/997 breeds. A seventh-generation 911, which will beget a new, third-generation Boxster/Cayman, is scheduled to bow at this fall’s Frankfurt auto show. To compile the evidence that would convincingly prove which engine location works better, we dug deeply into our box of tools.

Cayman Dynamics, a team of vehicle-dynamics experts on call to support our more ambitious tests, cracked the door to a local laboratory where a million-dollar test rig measured each Porsche’s center-of-gravity height and polar moment of inertia [see “Engine-Location Glossary”].

Supplementing the normal acceleration, braking, and cornering tests, we lapped the Chrysler Proving Grounds road circuit where the Dodge Viper’s fangs were sharpened. All our tests were run with stability control disabled.

To measure agility and predictability at the ragged edge of adhesion, we reconfigured the classic slalom test and cooked up a new step-steering-input maneuver.

To monitor yaw rate and slip angle throughout our tests, we used a dual-antenna Racelogic VBOX II SXSL3 data logger.

And, in celebration of Michigan’s endearing spring weather, we attacked a favorite local road with each Porsche to determine which was capable of posting the higher average speed on a 1.0-mile wet-pavement run.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN

Theory says that for optimal performance, a sports car’s center of gravity (CG) should be as low as possible and closer to the drive wheels than the steering wheels. (Front-drivers read from a different chapter in the physics book.) To visualize polar moment of inertia, think of a figure skater spinning in a pirouette or a high diver tucking in limbs to accelerate rotation off the board. Now transfer those visions to a sports car: Concentrating the engine as close as possible to the vertical axis of rotation reduces the polar moment of inertia, theoretically making it easier to begin and end any cornering maneuver.

Our lab tests revealed that the GT3’s CG height is a worthwhile 0.6 inch lower than the Cayman’s. But that four-percent advantage pales in comparison to the Cayman’s 20-percent-smaller moment of inertia. Those figures tell you little on their own. But when we dig into the battery of dynamic tests, knowing the two Porsches’ inner secrets might help illuminate how one is able to trump the other.

[gopher]//player.hearstdigitalstudios.com/brightcove/1013788098001?width=100%25&autostart=0&aratio=16:9 &cc%5B%5D=[/gopher]

Even though the crux of this story is handling, it’s worth noting that the 911’s acceleration and braking superiority goes beyond its better power-to-weight ratio and its track-worthy tires. Accurately knowing the CG location in both cars reveals that the rear (driving) tires carry 74 percent of the 911’s weight during hard initial acceleration versus only 67 percent of the Cayman’s. (More load equals better launch traction.) During braking, when nearly equivalent tire loading yields the shortest stops, the dynamic distribution is 58/42 percent, front to rear in the 911, versus 64/36 in the Cayman. Factor in the downforce provided by the 911’s rear wing, and the braking advantage swings further in its favor.
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE

• RIDING THE MARRY-GO-ROUND

Circulating a 300-foot skidpad at the limit of adhesion reveals the most fundamental facet of handling: the maximum-average grip (a.k.a. roadholding) available for cornering maneuvers.

The two Porsches finished close in this test. The 911 GT3’s 1.01-g roadholding topped that of the Cayman R by a slim 0.01-g margin. Both demonstrated minimal understeer. While they differed little in feel at the limit, our recorded measurements showed a slip angle of 1.8 degrees in the Cayman versus 1.0 degree in the 911. (In this instance, slip measured at the CG is proportional to understeer.)
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Under consistent throttle pressure, the 911 demonstrates a rock-steady lock on its cornering line. With a touch too much gas pedal, it slides predictably wide.

In spite of its second-place finish on the pad, the Cayman earned a moral victory attributable to its tires. In comparison to the 911’s sticky Michelin Pilot Sport Cup radials, the Cayman’s Bridgestone Potenza RE050A rubber has a narrower section width and a much less aggressive construction (intended more for general driving than track use). The Cayman R demonstrated excellent behavior, with linear responses to minor throttle and/or steering corrections aimed at holding the line.
Win (barely): 911 GT3.
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/amv-prod-cad-assets/ez/images/media/images/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test22/4382956-1-eng-US/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test2.jpg?resize=480:*[/IMG]
JOHN ROE

• THROUGH THE SLALOM

To challenge agility, we created a new 610-foot slalom course with 10 cones spaced at increasing then decreasing intervals to mix acceleration and braking into the classic serpentine maneuver [see diagram]. Thanks to its shorter wheelbase and superior tires, the GT3 reigned supreme in this event with an average speed of 49.9 mph, exactly 2 mph quicker than the Cayman R. The 911’s speed varied nearly 15 mph on this course versus about 12 mph of variance for the Cayman.

The 911 loved being tossed through the tighter gates, while the Cayman worked best with smooth, patient hands at the wheel. The Cayman’s fluidity and narrower rear width were key assets. Our instruments revealed that both Porsches achieved peak grip of 1.11 g; the Cayman’s maximum slip angle was again nearly double that recorded by the 911. Win: 911 GT3.

• RACECOURSE SEGMENT

In an attempt to negate the 911 GT3’s 19-percent pounds-per-horsepower advantage, we whittled Chrysler’s Evaluation and Handling Course down to a tight, 0.42-mile squiggle containing three right turns and three left turns [see diagram]. That did not stop the 911 from trumping the Cayman by 2.0 mph.

The 911 won, thanks to its holy trinity of advantages: better acceleration, braking, and cornering. It was easy to rotate the rear-engined car into every bend under trail braking, and it rocketed onto each short chute as if boosted by an afterburner. The GT3 recorded peak cornering of 1.20 g versus the Cayman’s 1.13 g.
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE

The Cayman’s more relaxed demeanor makes it easier to drive. While the steering is slightly lighter in the Cayman than in the 911 GT3, road feel at the wheel is comparable in both Porsches. During dozens of two-direction passes, neither of our pair of test drivers dropped a wheel or came close to a spin. Both Porsches are primed and ready for track-day use by drivers ranging from rank amateurs to seasoned pros. Win: 911 GT3.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/amv-prod-cad-assets/ez/images/media/images/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test43/4382900-1-eng-US/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test4.jpg?resize=480:*[/IMG]
JOHN ROE
• SEEKING THE SPIN THRESHOLD



To determine just how aggressively these Porsches could be tossed into bends, we conducted a step-steering test at Chrysler’s vehicle dynamics (skidpad) facility. Our procedure had us achieving a target speed before abruptly snapping in and holding exactly 90 degrees of steering. Starting at 35 mph, we climbed the velocity ladder until each Porsche showed nervous behavior. No steering corrections were allowed. Our test equipment revealed that both Porsches responded with about the same 30 degrees of car rotation per second of  yaw velocity.

Under steady throttle, the Cayman finally spun at 75 mph. Backtracking a bit, we found that it became nervous at 65 mph with a tendency to drift sideways when full throttle was applied at that speed. When the throttle was abruptly lifted following 90 degrees of steering at 65 mph, the response was a gentle spin.
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The 911 confidently stepped up the speed ladder to 80 mph before things got dicey. Adding throttle at that speed was no problem. But dropping the throttle at 80 mph made this car extremely loose. At an entry speed of 85 mph, the 911 spun every time. Why? Because the combination of lateral (cornering) and longitudinal (propulsion) loading and the 911’s large polar moment of inertia finally overwhelmed the rear tires.

An interesting countermeasure we discovered is that the 911’s electronic throttle is programmed to close with utmost deliberation. This, in combination with a heavy clutch, makes heel-and-toe downshifting a bit of a chore. But the lazy throttle also diminishes the likelihood the 911 will gosideways when a driver lifts in the middle of a tight bend on slippery pavement. Win: 911 GT3.
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/amv-prod-cad-assets/ez/images/media/images/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test5/4382914-1-eng-US/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-test5.jpg?resize=480:*[/IMG]
JOHN ROE

• PUCKER-FACTOR TEST

One of the more revealing tests we conducted was a back-road blitz on a rainy afternoon. Even though the 911 GT3’s Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires were poorly suited to this task, this Porsche demonstrated impressive wet grip. Front-to-rear balance was commendable, and the 911 never slipped into a scary slide during braking, cornering, or when the two were mixed. However, we had to exercise care adding power when exiting bends because of the steep rush up the torque curve at the engine’s sweet spot. We noted some evidence of sphincter pucker.

In contrast, the Cayman R, riding on Bridgestone Potenzas with normal tread depth, triggered no reflexive twitches. While it suffered from a touch more understeer, this Porsche was able to use all of its power and a greater share of its handling prowess thanks to more benign responses, greater linearity, and more predictable general behavior. Better yet, the Cayman easily topped the GT3’s 66-mph best run by more than 2 mph. Win: Cayman R.
VIEW PHOTOS
JOHN ROE
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/amv-prod-cad-assets/images/media/51/2011-porsche-911-gt3-and-2012-porsche-cayman-r-testfinal-photo-406417-s-original.jpg?resize=480:*[/IMG]
JOHN ROE

THE RESULTS ARE CLEAR: The grizzled veteran 911 GT3 won with a score of four victories in five handling tests. This leads us to a number of conclusions. Hoary as it is, the tail-engine layout is still perfectly suitable. Thanks to the six decades of development Porsche has invested in this configuration, the 911’s combination of ample power, exemplary brakes, and tenacious grip lifts the performance bar beyond the reach of the new Cayman R. In this battle, scrupulous practice conquered sound theory.

But had we pitted the Cayman R against a more pedestrian 911, the handling tests likely would have been tighter. Or alternately, imagine for a minute a Cayman RS armed with more than 400 horsepower, a nice fat set of Pilot Sport Cup tires, and another dollop of carbon fiber. That would be one awesome Porsche. And one likely capable of finally eclipsing the iconic 911.
[IMG]https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/amv-prod-cad-assets/images/media/51/embed-bar-2-photo-406687-s-original-photo-520480-s-original.jpg?resize=480:*[/IMG]
JOHN ROE

THE MAN BEHIND PORSCHE'S MID-ENGINE PLAN

When Professor Ferdinand Porsche opened his design office, there was little operating capital but no lack of shrewd ideas. Adolf Rosenberger supplied both the means to move forward and a brilliant design direction. Dr. Ferry Porsche, a witness to the birth of the company’s mid-engine strategy, revealed in Chris Nixon’s Racing the Silver Arrows, “Our business manager Adolf Rosenberger had been a successful racing driver in the Twenties. He had driven the mid-engined Benz Tropfenwagen, and he told my father that it was an extraordinary car. After listening to Rosenberger’s experiences, we came to the conclusion that, as our engine [for the speculative P-wagen, which became Auto Union’s A-type grand prix racer] was going to produce ample horsepower, we must have most of the weight over the rear axle. We also decided to put the fuel tank in the middle, so that no matter if it was full or empty there was always the same weight distribution. All other racing cars had enough weight at the rear at the beginning of the race, but by the end there was not enough for good traction.” Eighty years later, the Rosenberger mid-engine blueprint is still preferred for optimum-handling race and road cars.

After the other Adolf rose to power, Rosenberger was imprisoned for “racial crimes,” then deported.
He represented Porsche in France and England, immigrated to the U.S. in 1939, changed his name to Alan Arthur Robert, and spent his remaining years in California.

JOHN ROE

[SheepDog]

ShareTweet


Last week, we wrote a story about the racing line and why it’s so important if you’re going to drive fast. Then we wrote about the difference between rear-engine, mid-engine, and front-engine vehicles a few days later. Today, we are greeted with a video that combines these two subjects in a manner that we can all learn from. It’s a clip of what happens when you don’t know how to drive your supercar.
Let’s review the tapes


The Ultima GTR comes around the corner about 2 seconds into the video, and at first everything looks normal. Then, you see the Ultima start to lose control. The car swerves to its right and drives up onto the curb. The driver then steers hard to the left, nearly misses a pedestrian, and comes to a halt after running into a small vehicle. Luckily, the only casualties in this collision are a few bumpers, lights, and rims on the Ultima.
Why it happened


Here’s our theory of what happened: the Ultima GTR is an extremely powerful mid-engine rear-wheel drive (RWD) car. Since it’s RWD, all its power goes straight to the back wheels. As we learned in our other post, RWD vehicles are prone to oversteer (for those who don’t know, oversteer simply means turning more sharply than was intended). Typically oversteer occurs when rear tires lose traction because of road conditions, or because the RPMs are too high.



In this case, the Ultima GTR driver rounded the corner and accelerated too hard before straightening out the wheels. With the wheels still turned right, the car lost traction and sent the back end out to the left, pointing the car wheels further to the right. That resulted in them running off the road and crashing their beautiful supercar.

The moral of this story

If you’re going to drive fast, learn how to do it right. Check out some of our posts to get you started, and maybe even take a look at these videos from Motor Trend’s The Racing Line. They won’t steer you wrong.

And most importantly, drive safe out there. Driving becomes more dangerous the faster you go, so take it seriously, learn the proper techniques, and always respect the machine.

[SheepDog]

Is this approximately what the LT2 will sound like in the C8.

The Ultima GTR run a Corvette Small block push rod engine.

Allow for the difference between the sounds of a manual and a DCT. and weight difference.


https://youtu.be/knkLNpnSNRw


https://youtu.be/bz71eKCtZEY

Just for Sound of the anticipated LT2: Any information in a naturally aspirated Corvette LS7, retuned and revised by Mercury Marine to 8000RPM and 760HP.


https://youtu.be/Pd_chxOouYY

[meyerweb]

Second, if you ever lose control of a mid-engine vehicle and start to spin, it will be harder to overcome and stop the spin due to its low center of gravity.

No. Just no. This makes me question everything else he says.

However, front-engine FWD cars are prone to understeer, because they lose traction when accelerating due to the car’s weight shifting to the rear wheels.

More nonsense.

There's even more, but I'm not going to bother quoting them all. Suffice it to say the author doesn't understand very much about vehicle dynamics.

[meyerweb]

And I think the Porsche comparo was as much about HP and tires as engine location. Even Porsche runs mid-engine race cars when rules permit, and I don't see any grids filled with rear engine cars (except Porsche-only races).

[SheepDog]

And I think the Porsche comparo was as much about HP and tires as engine location. Even Porsche runs mid-engine race cars when rules permit, and I don't see any grids filled with rear engine cars (except Porsche-only races).

Thanks.
I am alone on this one: I expect the base C8 to equal the Turbo S. Forum members are are doubting it. The development appeared to target that Turbo S and not the Porsche Carrera. I assume it is doable and they made it happen or nearly. If the C8 street cars are the master of the Porches, then they will move the engine forward in a street model as in the RSR racer or do whatever necessary. They have been doing a lot of work on their cars and does that anticipate the C8. And segment repositioning. If the C8 takes their sales downward in the North American market, then that will be of importance to Porsche. They sell a lot of cars here. They can not be taking this lightly.

But there is the present unknown and uncertainty about the C8 engines and chassis. Just speculation. Porsche probably knows more than we do here about the C8.

[RoketRdr]

Thanks.
I am alone on this one: I expect the base C8 to equal the Turbo S. Forum members are are doubting it. The development appeared to target that Turbo S and not the Porsche Carrera. I assume it is doable and they made it happen or nearly. If the C8 street cars are the master of the Porches, then they will move the engine forward in a street model as in the RSR racer or do whatever necessary. They have been doing a lot of work on their cars and does that anticipate the C8. And segment repositioning. If the C8 takes their sales downward in the North American market, then that will be of importance to Porsche. They sell a lot of cars here. They can not be taking this lightly.

But there is the present unknown and uncertainty about the C8 engines and chassis. Just speculation. Porsche probably knows more than we do here about the C8.

They had the test mules running around in packs with the Turbo S so it would appear that is the bench mark.

[110dave]

A good read from sheepdog even if some disagreed tanks a ton

[MikeC8]

Porsche moved the engine in the 911 to mid engine configuration in the GTLM class recently. Why ?

According to Porsche they had to go mid engine to stay competitive in GTLM end of story. Their 911 street car is not a mid engine car. They already have a cayman. That races in GT4 in IMSA.

[SheepDog]

Porsche moved the engine slightly forward like mid engine in the GTLM class recently. Why ? Why do you think.

Porsche moves it 4 inches forward with each model revision. If they make a limited edition street version of the 911 RSR it would an instant collector classic.

[MikeC8]

Porsche moves it 4 inches forward with each model revision. If they make a limited edition street version of the 911 RSR it would an instant collector classic.

That means in 20 years if they keep this up it will be a FE car. ............😂 just kidding and don’t tell the 911 crowd