Has there ever been a MF engined car? (Not MR)

[Famine]

💡
By reading the entire thread, and not just my response to a fellow North Carolinian, you would see that I had previously taken part in this thread (note the handy user names ot the left of posts) and therefore it would be impossible to have read simply the first and last posts. Nice try at being condescending, and kudos on being one of the few people that seems to have a grasp of the English language.

Au contraire. By definition, when you made your posts, each was the last post in the thread as was. Thus by visiting the thread three times and reading only the first and last post on each occasion, you have totally missed the discussion about engine placement.


One does have to wonder though - if you are so well-versed in the thread, why DID you miss the entire discussion and attempt your own primary condescension towards your fellow North Carolinan?

Simply, you jumped in because you thought someone was being foolish and, in your haste to correct them, fell over your own foolishness. It's no big sin, but quit trying to pass the buck.

 

[LandoAWD]

Au contraire. By definition, when you made your posts, each was the last post in the thread as was.

Correct.

Thus by visiting the thread three times and reading only the first and last post on each occasion, you have totally missed the discussion about engine placement.

Incorrect. This is an assumption on your part. We have a saying about assumptions in the "colonies", and you and I have both fallen under its umbrella.

One does have to wonder though - if you are so well-versed in the thread, why DID you miss the entire discussion and attempt your own primary condescension towards your fellow North Carolinan?

My reasons were stated above. Please read the thread.

Simply, you jumped in because you thought someone was being foolish and, in your haste to correct them, fell over your own foolishness.

Could be. Most forums I moderate have a "keep threads on topic" rule, which is evidently not the case here. In addition to this, "mid-front" and "front-mid" are quite similar in wording but carry two wholly different meanings. Being as we obviously speak the same language, you can see the opportunity for mistakes.

It's no big sin, but quit trying to pass the buck.

I stated my point of confusion, reason for confusion, etc. I am not trying to pass anything but this argument to let this thread continue.

 

[Famine]

No argument from me. I'm just playing...

Anyway, a discussion of what constitutes "mid-engine" is within the vagaries of a topic about mid-engine/front-wheel drive and rear-engine/front-wheel drive cars. By understanding what "mid-engine" or "rear-engine" really mean, one can have a better grasp of the concepts posed in the initial post.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't personally class a Viper, Cerbera, Scaglietti or Storm as "mid-engined", no matter where the engine is in relation to the front axle (which car has a front axle anyway?), since it's in front of the driver, so it's front engined.

The definition of rear and mid engine is more complicated. If the engine block is located entirely beyond the rear axle, it's rear-engined. If it's not entirely behind the rear axle, it's mid-engined. Well, in my book anyway.


So other than the tanks I mentioned and the bizarre Buckmeinster Dymaxion The359 highlighted, I think finding an MF/RF car will be tough.

 

[LandoAWD]

Nevertheless, I wouldn't personally class a Viper, Cerbera, Scaglietti or Storm as "mid-engined", no matter where the engine is in relation to the front axle (which car has a front axle anyway?), since it's in front of the driver, so it's front engined.

The definition of rear and mid engine is more complicated. If the engine block is located entirely beyond the rear axle, it's rear-engined. If it's not entirely behind the rear axle, it's mid-engined. Well, in my book anyway.

You are dead on here. The "mid" classification used to describe the engine being "behind the front axles" is a little bit rediculous when you look at true mid-engined car's layout. I haven't seen a configuration as such noted "mid" anything other than here.

No argument from me. I'm just playing...

👍 Added a spark to a dull work day.

 

[Driftster]

Well from what I understand, engines mounted with so much of the engine overhang is behind the front axles it's considered Mid mounted....that was one of the big "woo haa's" about the 350z when it first debuted, people wouldn't shut up about it.

 

[Delirious]

...so yeah, are there any recent/modern cars that classify as what most people consider a "MF" car? (aka the engine is behind them and obviously the front wheels drive it

 

[LandoAWD]

I really doubt it, but you never know. I doubt any mfr would risk poor sales due to sub-par vehicle design.

 

[emad]

I'm not 100% but I think the Nissan Altima/Maxima would be the closest to hit the Mid-front category. It's only an assumption though since the 350z and the G35 both share the engine and basic chassis of the altima which is FWD. I might be wrong though

 

[enuttage]

The later generation Lotus Elan is a mid-engine FWD car, and it is said to be one of the best-handiling FWD cars ever made. The engine is behind the front axle, but still in front of the cabin. It's technically mid-engine, though probably not like you're thinking of it.

Um, it's a front-engine, front-drive car. The engine may be smashed back up close to the firewall, but it's undeniably an FF car by any reasonable definition.

The latter part of your first sentence is dead on though. It is (was) one of the better handling FF cars in the world. They are an absolute blast to drive.

-E

 

[Dave A]

Have you read any of the thread? If the engine is behind the front axel and infront of the rear one, it's technically mid-engined, so yes that Elan can be called a mid engined car. Mid engined cars where the enigne is located infront of the cabin are still called front engined cars.

 

[Duke]

As is the RX-8, among others. The engine is aft of the front axle points so it is technically a midengine car (RWD, of course).

 

[enuttage]

Have you read any of the thread? If the engine is behind the front axel and infront of the rear one, it's technically mid-engined, so yes that Elan can be called a mid engined car. Mid engined cars where the enigne is located infront of the cabin are still called front engined cars.

Yeah, I read the whole thread. The Elan M100's engine isn't aft of the axle. The intake plenum is directly on top of the axle and the engine itself is fore of it.

So technically it ISN'T a mid-engined car, even by the definitions offered here. I should've been more clear that is was NOT a mid-engined, front-drive car. The gentleman who posted earlier was mistaken or misinformed, is all.

-E

 

[StigBelcherStyl]

Toyota IQ, 2008

Attached is article about Mid engine front wheel drive cars

Wikipedia Article Link

 

[Famine]

Toyota IQ, 2008

Attached is article about Mid engine front wheel drive cars

Wikipedia Article Link

Wow. This thread is nearly a decade old and you've updated it with a Front-Mid engined front wheel drive car from 6 years ago after all of the discussion in the thread about front-mid mount compared to mid-engined?

 

[synchromesh]

It's possible for maybe an electric car to have it's batteries behind the driver.

 

[Wiegert]

It's possible for maybe an electric car to have it's batteries behind the driver.

Batteries would be the BEV equivalent of a fuel tank though. Unless you're referring to the motor.

 

[All Your Base]

From what I heard, the Renault 5 was an MF car.

 

[StigBelcherStyl]

Has there ever been a Mid engine, front wheel drive car?
Yes, Please see the list bellow

Mid Mounted, Front Wheel Drive Cars:

Aston Martin
Aston Martin Cygnet, 2011-13*
Aston Martin Cygnet (Colette Special Edition), 2013*

BSA
BSA Scout, 1935

Citroen
Citroen DS, 1955-75
Citroen SM, 1970-75
Citroen Traction Avant, 1934-57

Cord
Cord 810/812, 1935-37

Renault
Renault 4, 1961-92
Renault 5, 1972-85
Renault 16, 1965-80

Saab
Saab Sonett Series 1, 1955-57

Scion
Scion IQ, 2009-on*

Toyota
Toyota IQ, 2008-on (*Although Toyota says it falls in the FF category it really is MF*)



Rear Engine, Front Wheel Drive:

Buckminster Fuller
Buckminster Fuller Dymaxion Car, 1933

Coleman Motors
Coleman Motors Maroon Car, 1932

 

[Pseudopod]

I'm glad this thread was revived cause it gave me some interesting reading

 

[synchromesh]

Has there ever been a Mid engine, front wheel drive car?
Yes, Please see the list bellow

Mid Mounted, Front Wheel Drive Cars:

Aston Martin
Aston Martin Cygnet, 2011-13*
Aston Martin Cygnet (Colette Special Edition), 2013*

BSA
BSA Scout, 1935

Citroen
Citroen DS, 1955-75
Citroen SM, 1970-75
Citroen Traction Avant, 1934-57

Cord
Cord 810/812, 1935-37

Renault
Renault 4, 1961-92
Renault 5, 1972-85
Renault 16, 1965-80

Saab
Saab Sonett Series 1, 1955-57

Scion
Scion IQ, 2009-on*

Toyota
Toyota IQ, 2008-on (*Although Toyota says it falls in the FF category it really is MF*)

View attachment 289370

Rear Engine, Front Wheel Drive:

Buckminster Fuller
Buckminster Fuller Dymaxion Car, 1933

Coleman Motors
Coleman Motors Maroon Car, 1932

Yes, those are MF cars but not what we would think of being mid engined, because the motor is not behind the driver. This would make the Lister Storm a mid engined car, even though the engine is in the front, and is classified as an FR.

 

[mustafur]

I remember back on GT5 I used to have a setup on Mazda Kusubi that had 40/60 weight distribution as a FWD, it was very slow off the line but handling wise it worked really well.

It was like 911 without any throttle in oversteer and understeer was basically non existent, did well online too seemed to have the measure of the Spoon Civics.

 

[homeforsummer]

Yes, those are MF cars but not what we would think of being mid engined, because the motor is not behind the driver. This would make the Lister Storm a mid engined car, even though the engine is in the front, and is classified as an FR.

The Lister Storm is one of many front-engined, rear-drive vehicles considered "front-mid engined". If the engine is located between the axles, rather than hung out one side or the other, it's technically mid-engined.

It does make me wonder about the technicality of a vehicle whose engine is located directly over an axle, particularly in a rear-engined car (I'm thinking specifically the Smart Fortwo, which is neither mid- nor rear-engined but somewhere between the two) but frankly this is one of those subjects that has no real merit so I'm not sure it matters. If someone wanted to get that technical about it they might as well start discussing left-to-right weight distribution too, since so few vehicles have an even weight distribution across the axles.

"I have a mid-engined car... and a little to the left".

 

[TexRex]

It does make me wonder about the technicality of a vehicle whose engine is located directly over an axle

Such as Ferrari boxers (yeah, most of the engine is ahead of the axles but certainly not all of it)

and Oldsmobile Toronados (and Cadillac Eldorados equipped with the TH425).