I put Wiki in the category of using being too literal with the definition.

Here's a couple more examples. Would you call the NorthStar engine an OHV (overhead valve) engine? It meets the strict definition, in that its valves are on top of the heads. But we all know that's not really what it means and no one ever calls the NorthStar an OHV.

Would you call the Kappas' blown Ecotec a "supercharged" engine? It meets the strict definition, in that supercharging simply means to mechanically pressurize the intake. But in reality few people use "supercharging" to describe an exhaust-driven blower.

My point is, many things transcend their literal definition to commonly mean something slightly different and the literal definition no longer applies.

 

What would you call the Corvette then? Sure it is a FRONT ENGINE because the engines in front of the driver, but if you really want to get technical, it is a MID ENGINE configuration, by definition, because it resides COMPLETELY between the axles. Like I say, I agree w/ you, and we're just talking semantics, but regardless of how lazy people, or magazine writers, or even the manufacturers themselves get w/ their language skills, the car would still be considered a mid-engine because of where it is located. I've heard people call the 911 a mid engine too because the engine is in the back. While people may accept it because its the common term, it still is not technically correct.

The point is, the mid-engine configuration is favored because of the weight distribution and it's affect on handling. W/ the Corvette already having near 50/50 distribution ( I think it's 51/49), what would be the point of going mid-rear when it would A. Kill the traditional look of the car (long hood), B. Greatly reduce the amount of cargo room the current layout has, and C. Offer NO benefits for doing so, other than to do something new and crowing about it (even if it doesn't make a bit of difference functionally in performance)?

 

Possibly further centralizing mass and perhaps experiment with a bit of rearward weight bias and its effect on balance and grip (especially in dynamic/transitional situations).

 

I'd prefer they call it something else and make it beside the corvette. They can still make it, but you will ruffle too many feathers by makign that big of a change and still calling it a corvette.

 

How about Fiero? lol

I would make a nifty car, but I think the Corvette has too much going for it by being a front engine car. Too much history, practicality (the rear cargo room), plus, where would you stow the convertible top in a mid engine?

It's 51/49 as it is...that's good enough for me.

 

You guys are totally missing the boat. This opens the door for the Cadillac Coupe!

 

Here's something to consider ... remember how "well received" the exposed headlights were on the C6? (compared to the hide-aways since the 60's? ) ..... if just the stupid headlights got Corvette fanatics up in arms, just imagine what putting the engine behind them would do?!

 

I'm not missing it at all. Would y'all rather have a Cien (built alongside a mass-market mid-engined C7 on the line at BG) or another XLR?

 

Naw, not missing the point, but why dont you guys just pressure GM into building a 600 hp AWD, SMG equipped rear engined turbocharged 3 cylinder coupe and call it a Camaro.

 

Josh,
You might want to go back and look at the bottom of the first page of the thread. The boat has left the harbor already.

 

Yet the NSX is going the opposite direction.

I have no problem with mid-engined cars. I'd hesitate to use the Corvette name, though obviously this has been pondered before:


video

Aside from the opportunity for a Cadillac Cien, Corvette moving mid-engine would also provide room for a Kappa-based "Stingray" model as has been reported before:


http://www.motortrend.com/future/con...appa_sting_ray story

 

I was thinking the same thing.

 

I'd rather see this car as a Cadillac Cien positioned above, but not replacing, the XLR.

I wouldn't mess with the Corvette's configuration.

 

I wouldn't buy a mid-engined Vette, and with such perfect balance, there's no need for it IMO.