Why aren't there more rear engine cars?

[300bhp/ton]

I know there have been a few over the years such as the Imp, a Skoda or two and the Aplines, plus a few Russian ones.

But in general rear engine cars are rare apart from the 911.

So considering all the small scale sports and supercar makers as well as the mainstream cars, why aren't there more rear engine ones about today?


Porsche time and time again prove that it works with regards to performance, ability and actual driving pleasure. So there must be something in it.

Even here up against the latest Corvette and Ferrari the Porsche is still chosen as the drivers car:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6y7oeZx9WY


Which makes me wonder why there are so many front and mid engine options out there, but pretty much no other rear engine ones?

[Vladimir]

Because it's actually "wrong" and has taken Porsche decades to polish and hone. The "poor mans" Porkers like the Cayman have a far better layout.

[Hasbeen]

Ever tried taking the shopping home in a GT40 replica?

[Kawasicki]

Platform sharing, maybe. Crash performance, maybe.

The new Twingo will be rear engined, it will share with the Smart I think.

The VW UP! concept was rear engined, then they switched to fwd, probably due to strict snow performance targets.

[300bhp/ton]

Vladimir said:

Because it's actually "wrong" and has taken Porsche decades to polish and hone. The "poor mans" Porkers like the Cayman have a far better layout.

I know it's urban myth, folk lore or just quoting Jeremy Clarkson to claim "it's actually wrong".

But it isn't is it. Proven by the fact that all Porsches have always been superb drivers and performance cars. They haven't only just perfected, they've been fantastic since the 356.

That said, even if you do believe they have only just sorted it, you could pay close attention to the wheelbase, track and weight distribution of the current 911 to give you a very good starting point.

[The Vambo]

300bhp/ton said:

Porsche time and time again prove that it works with regards to performance, ability and actual driving pleasure. So there must be something in it.

I think the fact that Porsche chose to make the CGT, Boxster/Cayman & 918 all mid engined, makes it all the more impressive that they have managed to overcome the inherent fault of having a pendulum at the rear of a car.

[PhillipM]

And that porche had to deliberate hobble the Cayman so it didn't interfere with the 911, and the 911 has the engine and transaxle pushed so far forwards these days it's almost mid engine anyway.

It's great for traction, but not so much for handling balance.

[ian_touring]

Good question, conditioned expectation? This will change. As more cars have hybrid drivetrains, notions of "front-" and "rear engined" become obsolete, with black boxes hidden away will become the norm.

[300bhp/ton]

PhillipM said:

And that porche had to deliberate hobble the Cayman so it didn't interfere with the 911, and the 911 has the engine and transaxle pushed so far forwards these days it's almost mid engine anyway.

It's great for traction, but not so much for handling balance.

No offence, but watch the YouTube link I posted. If it's not so good for handling balance, how the smeg do people rate the 911 as the best drivers car

Something doesn't compute....

Edited by 300bhp/ton on Wednesday 9th October 16:34

[J4CKO]

No, its a daft idea, we worked this out back in the eighties when we lashed a Suffolk Punch Motor Mower engine to the back of a go kart, slung on some thick steel way out back, the resultant contraption had a tendency to understeer and the front wheels to bob about a bit and if you really pushed it in the wet the weight at the back would cause a sudden, violent spin, I reckon with perhaps 50 or so years of development and vast amounts of cash we could have made it work.

[300bhp/ton]

997 looks to have the engine very rearward still. It's difficult to tell from these picks, but it doesn't look any more "mid" engined than the classic on.

[selym]

J4CKO said:

No, its a daft idea, we worked this out back in the eighties when we lashed a Suffolk Punch Motor Mower engine to the back of a go kart, slung on some thick steel way out back, the resultant contraption had a tendency to understeer and the front wheels to bob about a bit and if you really pushed it in the wet the weight at the back would cause a sudden, violent spin, I reckon with perhaps 50 or so years of development and vast amounts of cash we could have made it work.

Why the hell didn't you feed back your findings to Porsche then? They would have been very interested in your research.

[kambites]

I thought an increasing number of city cars were going rear-engined now?

[monthefish]

Most cars are FWD and therefore to keep the drivetrain short, you place the engine in the same vicinity.

Also harder to cool an engine located in the mid/rear.

[TheInternet]

Porsche said:

we worked this out back in the fifties when we lashed a VW Beetle Suffolk Punch Motor Mower engine to the back of a Beetle go kart, slung on some thick steel way out back, the resultant contraption had a tendency to understeer and the front wheels to bob about a bit and if you really pushed it in the wet the weight at the back would cause a sudden, violent spin, I reckon with perhaps 50 or so years of development and vast amounts of cash we could have made it work.

[300bhp/ton]

monthefish said:

Most cars are FWD and therefore to keep the drivetrain short, you place the engine in the same vicinity.

Also harder to cool an engine located in the mid/rear.

I was thinking more of sporty cars if I'm honest. I'm just surprised that a layout that evidently does work isn't found on more cars.

[Superhoop]

300bhp/ton said:

I know it's urban myth, folk lore or just quoting Jeremy Clarkson to claim "it's actually wrong".

But it isn't is it. Proven by the fact that all Porsches have always been superb drivers and performance cars.

It's not just a Clarksonism though, and whilst there is no right or wrong in car design, if you were starting with a clean sheet of paper, it's unlikely that you would put the engine where it is in the 911 - As has been said already, Porsche have been fighting against what is essentially the engine in a dynamically difficult position for 50 years

yes they've been successful, but you can't get around the fact that the mass of the engine is outside of the wheel base, and makes the 911 tricky on the limit

[TEKNOPUG]

Porsche have been building rear-engined sports for 70 years, yet none of the other myriad of subsequent sports-car manufacturers have thought to copy them....

[McWigglebum4th]

As the steery and pedally bits need to go at the front.

The steery and pedally bits need an oily bit to live in

So you get a really small boot up the front.

So mostly packaging reasons

[J4CKO]

selym said:

J4CKO said:

No, its a daft idea, we worked this out back in the eighties when we lashed a Suffolk Punch Motor Mower engine to the back of a go kart, slung on some thick steel way out back, the resultant contraption had a tendency to understeer and the front wheels to bob about a bit and if you really pushed it in the wet the weight at the back would cause a sudden, violent spin, I reckon with perhaps 50 or so years of development and vast amounts of cash we could have made it work.

Why the hell didn't you feed back your findings to Porsche then? They would have been very interested in your research.

We did, along with our second paper "Why Air Cooled Engines Duck Donkey Balls", referencing again our findings with the Suffolk Punch Engine, the stole our ideas and lashed six of the fkers together !

A Porsche engineer at the time did confide, he said the 911 was designed to be their first Front engined FWD car but someone put the seats in the wrong way round.