Quote:
Originally Posted by CFECO
I can agree with the "parts bin" factor, much easier to use what is already designed and built. For the most part rear drive vehicles handle better and have better weight transfer than front drive layouts. Rear engine cars can have great traction due to weight distribution, as can front drive, but due to moments of inertia, mid engine is better overall. Too bad the existing "packages", due not have low profile arrangements to allow them to be installed mid-mounted, below usable spaces.
|
IMHO for an "ordinary" car FWD wins - the advantages it gives in terms of packaging, access to the mechanical parts for servicing and stability are more valuable in every day driving than the ultimate in handling which having a hard to get at engine mounted in the middle would provide.
However if you were going to go for it then a Flat 4 may be suitable ? This car (Clan Clover) was a development of a car called a Clan which was originally based on the rear engined Hillman Imp
The difference was that the clover used the flat four engine from an Alfa-Sud, which is a very short and low engine as shown here.
It was mounted ahead of the rear wheels with the diff mounted in between them - effectively moving the FWD drivetrain to the rear. You could mount something like this (or a Sube F4 if you wanted to) quite low I would think which would give you a reasonable amount of space.
Can't help thinking the overall shape is looking like the ECV3 of the 1980s
It was a working car, there is a road test
here - 115 MPH and 62MPG from 1.1 litres with a carb.
From a safety and comfort angle I would prefer to have my feet behind the axle line rather than pushed towards the middle of the car.
This is assuming the aim of this project is to make a practical car.