Transverse mid engined cars

[Scuffers]

blueg33 said:

I would be interested to know what you thing is wrong with an Evora. Have your driven one? have you lived with one?

People don;t consider them because they don't really know they exist. That is marketing

I'll take a stab at this!

Look, nobody is saying it's a dog, however, it's not pin-sharp in the handling department, it;s too heavy, the weight is too high up.

Yes, Lotus have done a wonderful job to tune the suspension and electronics to mask it best they can, but you cannot escape it's weight.

it kind of reminds me of the GTR, it's a marvel when you consider what it is, but when push comes to shove, it also can't disguise it's mass.

911 is in the same kind of weight bracket, but does not have the same top-heavy feel about it and as such is somewhat less ponderous.

[otolith]

I'd love to try an Evora. The 911 didn't really do it for me, and it did feel heavy.

[kambites]

otolith said:

I'd love to try an Evora. The 911 didn't really do it for me, and it did feel heavy.

The 997 especially feels extremely heavy and inert. I'd be very disappointed (although not entirely surprised) if the Evora is as numb feeling.

I must find a way to have a go in a 9x1 series Porsche, because I found the 9x7 so hugely disappointing.

[Scuffers]

kambites said:

otolith said:

I'd love to try an Evora. The 911 didn't really do it for me, and it did feel heavy.

The 997 especially feels extremely heavy and inert. I'd be very disappointed (although not entirely surprised) if the Evora is as numb feeling.

kind of depends what you're going to use as a benchmark...

neither of them at an Elise or Caterham.

[kambites]

True, but I was more comparing the 9x7 to the 9x6. I don't expect a 911 or Boxster to handle like an Elise but the step backwards they seemed to have made was slightly depressing.

[blueg33]

Scuffers said:

blueg33 said:

I would be interested to know what you thing is wrong with an Evora. Have your driven one? have you lived with one?

People don;t consider them because they don't really know they exist. That is marketing

I'll take a stab at this!

Look, nobody is saying it's a dog, however, it's not pin-sharp in the handling department, it;s too heavy, the weight is too high up.

Yes, Lotus have done a wonderful job to tune the suspension and electronics to mask it best they can, but you cannot escape it's weight.

it kind of reminds me of the GTR, it's a marvel when you consider what it is, but when push comes to shove, it also can't disguise it's mass.

911 is in the same kind of weight bracket, but does not have the same top-heavy feel about it and as such is somewhat less ponderous.

Have you driven an Evora? You didnt answer that question, I think if you had driven one back to back with a 911 you would be saying something different. I have driven 993's, 996's and 997's extensively and do not recognise your statements.

I didnt say it was pin sharp handling a caterham or my old G33 were much better. But mass wise 2010 Evora is 1383kg, 2010 Cayman 1405kg (PORSCHE CAYMAN (987) 2.9), and a 2010 997 C2 appears to be 1425kg. Its only the latest new design Cayman and 911 that are lighter than the Evora

If you live anywhere near Gloucestershire and can insure yourself, you are welcome to have a go in my Evora

[Scuffers]

blueg33 said:

Have you driven an Evora? You didnt answer that question, I think if you had driven one back to back with a 911 you would be saying something different. I have driven 993's, 996's and 997's extensively and do not recognise your statements.

I didnt say it was pin sharp handling a caterham or my old G33 were much better. But mass wise 2010 Evora is 1383kg, 2010 Cayman 1405kg (PORSCHE CAYMAN (987) 2.9), and a 2010 997 C2 appears to be 1425kg. Its only the latest new design Cayman and 911 that are lighter than the Evora

If you live anywhere near Gloucestershire and can insure yourself, you are welcome to have a go in my Evora

pretty sure I covered that? yes I have driven the Evora, quite a few of them...

also, it's not 1,383Kg's, the actual cars on the road are the other side of 1,450 (and yes I have corner weights!)

anyway, it's to the weight er say as much as where it is.

[blueg33]

otolith said:

I'd love to try an Evora. The 911 didn't really do it for me, and it did feel heavy.

If you can make it to Kemble for the SW breakfast club on Sunday morning, you can have a go in mine as long as you don't kill it

[otolith]

blueg33 said:

If you can make it to Kemble for the SW breakfast club on Sunday morning, you can have a go in mine as long as you don't kill it

That's very kind of you, I shall try to make it

[RobM77]

I think it's a matter of preference really, as with most things. Personally, I prefer the Evora because for the things that I care about in a car, it's better. There are things the Porsches do better, but I'm not so bothered about those things. I'm frequently reminded on this forum that my likes and dislikes in cars are pretty niche, so I can understand people preferring the Cayman or 911.

[Captain Muppet]

blueg33 said:

Captain Muppet said:

Toyota make a longitudinal mounted version of that V6 engine. It isn't any lower. Which way round the engine is doesn't change it's centre of gravity.

But longitudinal mount should mean that you dont have to sit the negine on top of the gearbox etc and can therefore keep it lower>

Do you really think transverse engines sit on top of the gearbox somehow? The gearbox bolts on the end of the block, just like a longitudinal gearbox does.

[Scuffers]

Captain Muppet said:

Do you really think transverse engines sit on top of the gearbox somehow? The gearbox bolts on the end of the block, just like a longitudinal gearbox does.

some do, like the Mini, some don't.

the real metric is where the crank-line is relative to the drive-line

[AW111]

Scuffers said:

Captain Muppet said:

Do you really think transverse engines sit on top of the gearbox somehow? The gearbox bolts on the end of the block, just like a longitudinal gearbox does.

some do, like the Mini, some don't.

the real metric is where the crank-line is relative to the drive-line

In the MR2, the driveshafts are behind the block, around about the crank centreline.
I would guess 4cyl Lotus is similar.

[Captain Muppet]

Scuffers said:

Captain Muppet said:

Do you really think transverse engines sit on top of the gearbox somehow? The gearbox bolts on the end of the block, just like a longitudinal gearbox does.

some do, like the Mini, some don't.

the real metric is where the crank-line is relative to the drive-line

Sorry, I meant a typical modern gearbox, as used in any of the modern transverse mid-engined cars in this thread. MR2s, MGs and Lotuses.

For a given engine transverse doesn't make the engine higher than longitudinal. If your engine CofG is too high you need a different engine, not to fit the same engine the other way round.

[RobM77]

Of course, for most FE/RWD cars the gearbox is behind the engine, improving weight distribution fore/aft. Transverse engines tend to load everything at one end of the car.

[kambites]

Out of interest, does anyone know what the height of the Cayman's CoG is? Despite it being one of its major engineering strong-points, it seems strangely hard to find an actual figure.

[braddo]

kambites said:

Out of interest, does anyone know what the height of the Cayman's CoG is? Despite it being one of its major engineering strong-points, it seems strangely hard to find an actual figure.

I'm sure i saw it mentioned by Toyota when referring to the GT86's. If you do a search for the old GT86 stories on PH you might find it. I think Toyota might have compared the CoG to both the Cayman and the MX5 (the GT86 being lower than both).

470cm rings a bell, which might have been the GT86 and the Cayman was perhaps 30cm higher?

[kambites]

braddo said:

I'm sure i saw it mentioned by Toyota when referring to the GT86's. If you do a search for the old GT86 stories on PH you might find it. I think Toyota might have compared the CoG to both the Cayman and the MX5 (the GT86 being lower than both).

470cm rings a bell, which might have been the GT86 and the Cayman was perhaps 30cm higher?

Interestingly, that would make both higher than the Elise with its tall inline-four. I guess just because the rest of the car is so low.

[braddo]

Google says 18 inches for GT86 and Cayman here:

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2013-scion-fr-s-o...

Maybe the difference I have a foggy memory of reading was 3cm and not 30cm.

[kambites]

Yes, I suspect a Range Rover's CoG is barely 30cm higher.