mid/rear rwd hatch/estate?
Discussion
Just a random thought...
But as is the way that modern cars are getting bigger and boxier at the front to allow clearance for the engine and pedestrian impact regs. I got to wondering about a somewhat niche alternative.
With engines being more compact these days and having electronic gear shifting it means there is less requirement to have all the bits connected mechanically.
So take a car say the size and shape of a classic Impreza wagon. But fit the engine in the boot instead, either a slant or canted inline or even sticking with the Subaru theme, a boxer engine. With the engine transversely mounted there's plenty of room for the gearbox too. It could even be turbo charged.
Above the engine you could still have a fairly large stowage space and you'd have a front boot too. I know you'd lose the single "big load space". But you'd probably still have a similar amount of total stowage space (hence niche).
But what it would offer is still a practical usable package in terms of hauling and people carrying. Easy assembly using common parts. But with the addition of rwd and the opportunity to have a prettier less bulky looking front.
With a properly designed bulkhead and setup you could also probably lower NVH levels for front passengers too, as all the noise would be behind you.
And as the front would no longer be housing an engine you could even extend the wheel base and have almost no front overhang.
But as is the way that modern cars are getting bigger and boxier at the front to allow clearance for the engine and pedestrian impact regs. I got to wondering about a somewhat niche alternative.
With engines being more compact these days and having electronic gear shifting it means there is less requirement to have all the bits connected mechanically.
So take a car say the size and shape of a classic Impreza wagon. But fit the engine in the boot instead, either a slant or canted inline or even sticking with the Subaru theme, a boxer engine. With the engine transversely mounted there's plenty of room for the gearbox too. It could even be turbo charged.
Above the engine you could still have a fairly large stowage space and you'd have a front boot too. I know you'd lose the single "big load space". But you'd probably still have a similar amount of total stowage space (hence niche).
But what it would offer is still a practical usable package in terms of hauling and people carrying. Easy assembly using common parts. But with the addition of rwd and the opportunity to have a prettier less bulky looking front.
With a properly designed bulkhead and setup you could also probably lower NVH levels for front passengers too, as all the noise would be behind you.
And as the front would no longer be housing an engine you could even extend the wheel base and have almost no front overhang.
vdubbin said:
Like so? As you say, you've two smaller storage compaortments instead of one larger bay. Weight distribution is all the way back, adn you're assumignthe avergage punter is going to be smart enough to balance the load between comaprtments.
Cool, what exactly are they?I'm not sure you'd have to balance any loads really. Cars don't normally carry huge weights. The rear load area would be higher up, so less likely to try and put a real heavy object in.
Modern ESP systems would also be useful though I admit.
doogz said:
Not a bad idea. Better sticking with a longitudinally mounted flat 4 if you're going to do it that way imo. Might work better in something more 4x4 sized, it might protrude under the rear seats a bit. Putting an engine in the rear, especially if you want to turbocharge it, is going to invite some other fun problems to the party. Cooling, for example.
I was debating this. I suspect either sticking with a front mounted rad (which is still small) or maybe a rear mounted one, but that'd be more tricky heat wise.I was partly thinking about the layout of my Roadster. The engine is a slant 3 inline turbo mounted on top of the axle. Cooling doesn't seem to be an issue with them. I can't see why other engines would really unless you are going huge or very high HP.
doogz said:
And you're talking about shifting the engine to the back, partly for the whole pedestrian safety reason, you're going to end up with the fuel tank up front.
Why? I'd have thought it could stay where it is. The engine would only be taking up what would have been the boot space. Again thinking of the layout of an MGF/Roadster/Elise or Boxster, they all have the tank behind the passengers.But maybe you are right, although I think it's workable.
doogz said:
Also, people don't want RWD cars these days, they're too dangerous!
True, but maybe if a few more rwd cars where available it'd help shift the popular consensus?Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 8th June 10:56
That's a VW Type 3 Squareback[url], and a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair]Cehvrolet Corvair
They Mitsubishi Miev (that's the regular, non-electric version) has its small engine between the rear wheels, and the VW Up! concept had it, so it might feature in a future small Dub.
They Mitsubishi Miev (that's the regular, non-electric version) has its small engine between the rear wheels, and the VW Up! concept had it, so it might feature in a future small Dub.
I think the reason you don't see cars like this often is that hatches/estates are meant to be practical. Putting the engine in the main load space inherently reduces that practicality while incresing the difficulty of access to the engine for servicing etc.
The volume of space may be the same but splitting it over 2 load areas (half boot, half in the front) doesn't help if you want to move something big.
It seems to be adding complications and reducing practicality for negligible benefit - most people really don't care about engine location and driven wheels.
The volume of space may be the same but splitting it over 2 load areas (half boot, half in the front) doesn't help if you want to move something big.
It seems to be adding complications and reducing practicality for negligible benefit - most people really don't care about engine location and driven wheels.
there's still a big market for mini-mpvs of this nature in the far east. Small bonnet with some ancileries in, then the engine is under the front drivers seat. Trouble is, it needs to be tall to get everything in - in your example of 'luggage above the engine' - this would block out all of the rear vision of the driver.
see the clio v6. no room for bags at all..
see the clio v6. no room for bags at all..
Didn't AMG manage to squeeze an(other) engine into the back of the mk1 A-class without raising the boot floor?
ETA: http://www.elchfans.de/aklasse_w168/a38_amg.php?st...
ETA: http://www.elchfans.de/aklasse_w168/a38_amg.php?st...
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 8th June 11:25
I've thought of this a couple of years ago, stop stealing my ideas, 
. I drew a couple of rough designs out and they looked like a Hillman Imp estate, but like a 'normal' estate, not a Husky. I reckon it's a super concept that could work well as a 5 or 3 door. Like you say, the two boot spaces could work well, as it allows almost double the floor space but at the front, the arches will intrude as these wheels need to turn in. Where the engine would be at the back, there is a wider gap for a transverse engine that at the front as the wheels don't need such big arches, opening up options for a larger boxer engine, or an engine at an angle like in the Imp.
It could work as hatch like this Fiat as shown in SOTW here, or better, as you say like an estate. On ARonline I think there is a picture of a protoype estate Imp which looks like the car I think you envisage bar from size and cosmetic styling differences but the webpage 'Imp Prototypes' isn't opening for me.
I'm looking forward to the RWD rear engined estate.
[/
]
. I drew a couple of rough designs out and they looked like a Hillman Imp estate, but like a 'normal' estate, not a Husky. I reckon it's a super concept that could work well as a 5 or 3 door. Like you say, the two boot spaces could work well, as it allows almost double the floor space but at the front, the arches will intrude as these wheels need to turn in. Where the engine would be at the back, there is a wider gap for a transverse engine that at the front as the wheels don't need such big arches, opening up options for a larger boxer engine, or an engine at an angle like in the Imp.It could work as hatch like this Fiat as shown in SOTW here, or better, as you say like an estate. On ARonline I think there is a picture of a protoype estate Imp which looks like the car I think you envisage bar from size and cosmetic styling differences but the webpage 'Imp Prototypes' isn't opening for me.
I'm looking forward to the RWD rear engined estate.
[/
]Edited by PH lurker on Wednesday 8th June 17:41
Of course if it's possible to get the top of the engine low enough to allow a decent boot above it (by, for example, using a slant or flat engine), it's almost certainly also low enough to avoid having to raise the bonnet line for pedestrian safety reasons. Not many cars have a boot floor as high as their bonnet.
At which point does all that become more space-efficient than a FWD estate?
Do people really want an estate car with slightly better dynamics and two oddly sized storage compartments (one narrow and not particularly deep at the front, and one wide but not particularly deep at the back), or do they want a 'normal' car with room to put three dishwashers in the back?
Do people really want an estate car with slightly better dynamics and two oddly sized storage compartments (one narrow and not particularly deep at the front, and one wide but not particularly deep at the back), or do they want a 'normal' car with room to put three dishwashers in the back?
RobM77 said:
Following on from what Kambites says, look at the Clio V6. The original Clio had four seats, an engine under the bonnest and a decent boot, but the V6 had just two seats and an engine; that was it! Somehow the rear seats, boot and bonnet got completely taken up!
But then look at the picture of the Merc that I posted on the last page. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff