Mid Engine C7?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
Mid engine means that the engine is between the front and rear axle, and yes the LS2 is set pretty far back from the front axle then a normal front engine car would be. The LS7 is even further and lower. Nissan/Infinity did this with there 350Z/G35 FM chassis.
I think that Corvette has too much of a history behind it to where going mid engine would kind of throw the whole thing into reverse. I dont see the need as every generation keeps getting better and better. If they could develop a space frame to have the flexability of a Front-Mid and a Mid engine platform, one could be used for Chevy, and a mid engine set up could be used for Caddy. Hell, you could have 2 Caddys, XLR and Cien, one front one mid engine and then the Corvette. 3 cars off one line...always keep the plant moving.
I think that Corvette has too much of a history behind it to where going mid engine would kind of throw the whole thing into reverse. I dont see the need as every generation keeps getting better and better. If they could develop a space frame to have the flexability of a Front-Mid and a Mid engine platform, one could be used for Chevy, and a mid engine set up could be used for Caddy. Hell, you could have 2 Caddys, XLR and Cien, one front one mid engine and then the Corvette. 3 cars off one line...always keep the plant moving.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,418
From: New Orleans, LA
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,209
there's always been a small but vocal faction among the Corvette guys at GM that push for a mid-engined car. In the end, though, they get silenced, and 'Vette remains front-engine, rear-wheel drive.
Technically, the Corvette is mid-engined, since the engine is set behind the front axle. The 4th gen F-bodies are also laid out this way, so we're technically driving mid-engined cars as well.
Technically, the Corvette is mid-engined, since the engine is set behind the front axle. The 4th gen F-bodies are also laid out this way, so we're technically driving mid-engined cars as well.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,647
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Only ideas I would be open to as far as the C7 goes are:
Gas/electric motor like the Lexus 450H.
Displacement on demand.
Part time AWD (switch so you can turn it off).
Camless motor (servos on top of each valve).
Gas/electric motor like the Lexus 450H.
Displacement on demand.
Part time AWD (switch so you can turn it off).
Camless motor (servos on top of each valve).
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 689
Boy, I wouldn't want an AWD Corvette. All that extra weight... uh-uh. And the dynamics would change a lot. It would make it into a completely different kind of car. At least a mid-engined configuration -- assuming pricing is close to the current level -- would keep the car's essential mission etc intact.
I think displacement on demand, vvt, etc, are inevitable as Washington gets more serious about forcing improved gas mileage and emissions, and that's fine. Most drivers won't even notice that stuff in daily use, and I think everybody would rather have a Vette that gets 28 mpg over one that gets 18 mpg if the driving experience and performance numbers aren't affected.
I think displacement on demand, vvt, etc, are inevitable as Washington gets more serious about forcing improved gas mileage and emissions, and that's fine. Most drivers won't even notice that stuff in daily use, and I think everybody would rather have a Vette that gets 28 mpg over one that gets 18 mpg if the driving experience and performance numbers aren't affected.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
Otherwise, the engine would start to crowd into the cabin, no? 
I guess if they could re-design the Corvette, make it a true mid-engine car, make it handle AT LEAST as well as it already does, but not increase the price, then what's to argue with?
(bah, who cares about tradition, right? 
) And like somebody pointed out, the more and more power they start pumping out, the harder it's going to be to launch these cars, so if the mid-engine helps that situation, then I guess it makes sense?? (I think that would be the final "stepping stone" in turning the Corvette into a "true", world-class, exotic super-car 
).
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,574
From: Arlington, Texas
Like he said, the Corvette already IS a mid engine, its just on the front side. Being mid engine doesn't always mean the engine has to be in the back. W/ the Corvettes tranny in the back, I think the weight distribution is already right at 50/50 isn't it? What would be the advantage? Mid engine cars w/ the engines in the back have different proportions too, and that would kill the vettes styling.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Even on cars where the entire engine is behind the front axle, those are not mid-engined cars. Technically I suppose you could argue that they are, but in practice mid-engined always means the engine is behind the driver. Nissan probably explains it best by calling their chassis FM, for "front mid" engine placement.
It's just one of those terms that has taken on a meaning beyond its literal interpretation.
It's just one of those terms that has taken on a meaning beyond its literal interpretation.
Last edited by R377; Jan 25, 2007 at 10:59 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,574
From: Arlington, Texas
Even on cars where the entire engine is behind the front axle, those are not mid-engined cars. Technically I suppose you could argue that they are, but in practice mid-engined always means the engine is behind the driver. Nissan probably explains it best by calling their chassis FM, for "front mid" engine placement.
It's just one of those terms that has taken on a meaning beyond its literal interpretation.
It's just one of those terms that has taken on a meaning beyond its literal interpretation.
I kind of sorta agree w/ you. There might not be many, if any other than the Corvette, but by definition, it IS mid-engined. I like the front-mid description though.
I hate to play the WIKI card, but here's what it says to attempt to clarify....
A mid-mounted engine describes the placement of an automobile engine between the rear and front axles. Another term for this is Mid-ship, this term is used mostly by Japanese manufacturers.
This layout is typically chosen for its relatively favorable weight distribution - the heaviest component is near the center of the car, making the main component of its moment of inertia relatively low. Heavier objects are harder to deflect in a new direction; on a vehicle the car handling ideal is for neither end to overpower the other with this tendency. Thus a mid-engine design aids in quickly changing the direction of the automobile's travel. Some perceive that a mid-engine design has reduced straight line stability [citation needed].
Sports and racing cars typically have a mid-engine design, as the vehicle's handling characteristics are more important than any other feature, such as practicality.
Traditionally, the term mid-engine layout has been applied to cars that place the engine and transaxle behind the driver but in front of the rear axles. This configuration is known as a mid-engine, rear-drive. An engine placed in front of the driver's compartment but fully behind the front axle line also meets the definition of a mid-engine.
The largest drawback of mid-engine cars is packaging - most mid-engine vehicles are two seater vehicles. The engine in effect pushes the passenger compartment forward towards the front axle (if engine is behind driver). Exceptions, where the vehicle is practical transportation for more than two people and a small amount of luggage, are rare - typically involving unusual length or the passengers sharing space with the engine - which can be between them or below them.
In the "behind the passenger" design, engine cooling can also be a potential problem, as in the Porsche 914 or Lotus Esprit, but that problem seems to have been largely solved in newer designs such as the Porsche 986. The Saleen S7 appears to also resolve the problem with the use of large engine-compartment vents on the sides and rear of the bodywork.
This layout is typically chosen for its relatively favorable weight distribution - the heaviest component is near the center of the car, making the main component of its moment of inertia relatively low. Heavier objects are harder to deflect in a new direction; on a vehicle the car handling ideal is for neither end to overpower the other with this tendency. Thus a mid-engine design aids in quickly changing the direction of the automobile's travel. Some perceive that a mid-engine design has reduced straight line stability [citation needed].
Sports and racing cars typically have a mid-engine design, as the vehicle's handling characteristics are more important than any other feature, such as practicality.
Traditionally, the term mid-engine layout has been applied to cars that place the engine and transaxle behind the driver but in front of the rear axles. This configuration is known as a mid-engine, rear-drive. An engine placed in front of the driver's compartment but fully behind the front axle line also meets the definition of a mid-engine.
The largest drawback of mid-engine cars is packaging - most mid-engine vehicles are two seater vehicles. The engine in effect pushes the passenger compartment forward towards the front axle (if engine is behind driver). Exceptions, where the vehicle is practical transportation for more than two people and a small amount of luggage, are rare - typically involving unusual length or the passengers sharing space with the engine - which can be between them or below them.
In the "behind the passenger" design, engine cooling can also be a potential problem, as in the Porsche 914 or Lotus Esprit, but that problem seems to have been largely solved in newer designs such as the Porsche 986. The Saleen S7 appears to also resolve the problem with the use of large engine-compartment vents on the sides and rear of the bodywork.
Last edited by CLEAN; Jan 25, 2007 at 01:20 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 455
From: Stafford, Va
I've wondered for a long time why the trans axle has not migrated to other GM RWD cars? In theory, it could create a little more interior room for the drive and front passanger. A little trunck space could/would be lost but I live with a non-existant one with my Camaro. IDK, I like the idea of it.
Disciple
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,479
Mid engined cars also throw practicality out the window. One of the nice things about the current Vette is its trunk and its usability as a daily driver. But with a mid-engined car there's very little room for a trunk in the back because the engine is there, and there's very little room in the front because the brakes, steering, rad, etc. are there.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Yes, but they use a boxer engine configuration, which is much flatter and more compact than a V8. Also, have you tried to work on the engine of a Boxster? I don't think the Corvette faithful would want something that difficult to get at.