transverse engine with rwd ?
transverse engine with rwd ?
Author
Discussion

vrooom

Original Poster:

3,763 posts

297 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Why dont car manufacturers build and sell cars with transverse engine with transverse Gearbox, like front wheel drive cars, designed to send the power to rear wheels, instead of front wheels instead of using the longitudinal engines/gearbox layout?

Im not talking about 4wd version.

Do they make any one?

Jimbo.

4,231 posts

219 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Packaging, complexity, cost I suspect.

Cupramax

11,007 posts

282 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Not production cars, no it just doesnt make engineering sense to. Apart from mid engine of course.

iva cosworth

44,044 posts

193 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Jimbo. said:
Packaging, complexity, cost I suspect.
This.

Why turn everything 90 degrees when with a north south engine the end of the crank goes

straight into the gearboxsmile

littleredrooster

6,412 posts

226 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Why would you want to put the engine and gearbox sideways and then turn the drive through 90 degrees? The major effect would be to place less weight over the (driven) rear wheels.

Manufacturers have been trying for years to achieve 50/50 weight distribution for good handling and this would surely have the opposite effect.

TurboBlue

686 posts

193 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Not sure but is the forthcoming Renault/Smart hatch not going to be rear drive, rear engine, transverse layout? Other than that, can't think of one.

Effortless

197 posts

225 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Technically very easy to do... but why would you? A longitudinal engine is far easier and cheaper to package to a longitudinal gearbox and drivetrain.

Quite a lot of 4wd cars have a similar system, transverse engine, a gearbox and transfer case, with drive to the front and rear wheels. Simple enough to remove the front wheel drive gubbins and leave it as rear drive.

But again... why would you?

Cheers,
Effortless

interloper

2,747 posts

285 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
It doesn't make sense from a weight distribution point of view, transverse normally means engine and box slightly in front of the front axle. Fine in fwd were the balance is normally towards the nose for traction. For rear wheel drive you want something closer to 50/50, hence having the engine north south and further back in the engine bay.

Zoobeef

6,004 posts

188 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Elise's, vx220s?

eldar

25,307 posts

226 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Makes as much sense as a front wheel drive Porsche 911.

carmadgaz

3,204 posts

213 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Zoobeef said:
Elise's, vx220s?
Are Mid Rear so the engine is essentially the same packaging as a Front engine, FWD.

zebra

4,555 posts

244 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Zoobeef said:
Elise's, vx220s?
Definitely the Lotus.

Zoobeef

6,004 posts

188 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
carmadgaz said:
Zoobeef said:
Elise's, vx220s?
Are Mid Rear so the engine is essentially the same packaging as a Front engine, FWD.
The op didn't say it had to be rear engined. Just transverse rear wheel drive. Both my vx and my noble are.

carmadgaz

3,204 posts

213 months

Tuesday 8th October 2013
quotequote all
Zoobeef said:
carmadgaz said:
Zoobeef said:
Elise's, vx220s?
Are Mid Rear so the engine is essentially the same packaging as a Front engine, FWD.
The op didn't say it had to be rear engined. Just transverse rear wheel drive. Both my vx and my noble are.
Ahh gotcha getmecoat