Do you prefer front-engined/rwd or mid-engined rwd?
Discussion
On the best "sports cars" thread(well I say sports cars but hardly any of them actually are!) the front engined/rwd and mid engined/rwd comparison was brought up. Now I do have rear engined/rwd experience in a 1982 Skoda Estelle, but that didn't end well because I wrapped it around a lamppost in the wet/rain! So since then I've only had front engined/rwd cars, and I don't have any experience with mid engined/rwd cars either(I would love a go in one though).
So I just wanted to know what your preference was and is one better than the other?. I know that some people on here do have experience of both layouts too.
So I just wanted to know what your preference was and is one better than the other?. I know that some people on here do have experience of both layouts too.
I have both. Started my driving career in many FR cars, but in 2017 started testing out 911s (RR) and finally settled on a Boxster S which is MR. I do also have an FF car (Audi A4 Avant) and dynamically, that thing is a disaster.
For me, security of handling of an FR car is great. If you know how to handle an RWD car on the limit, then you have a lot of latitude to play with power and steering. MR on the other hand can snap into oversteer much more easily - it's less forgiving, but it does have its pros - the car feels that much more agile and rotates much more freely which is what you'd expect of a sports car.
I don't prefer one or the other in the same way I don't prefer Indian or Chinese food. I like both, but sometimes I want one and sometimes I want the other. Which is why I have four cars!
For me, security of handling of an FR car is great. If you know how to handle an RWD car on the limit, then you have a lot of latitude to play with power and steering. MR on the other hand can snap into oversteer much more easily - it's less forgiving, but it does have its pros - the car feels that much more agile and rotates much more freely which is what you'd expect of a sports car.
I don't prefer one or the other in the same way I don't prefer Indian or Chinese food. I like both, but sometimes I want one and sometimes I want the other. Which is why I have four cars!
I regularly drive a Z4 and an MR2.
I'm more careful in the MR2, but that's probably more because of things I've read rather about sudden oversteer rather than because I have personal experience of either of them ever threatening to spin. I only drive on roads as well, so I'm hardly pushing it to the ragged edge.
I suppose mid engine is more exotic, but I wouldn't choose a car just because of it. I'm a real human with real life practical needs, so a usable boot is a good thing.
I'm more careful in the MR2, but that's probably more because of things I've read rather about sudden oversteer rather than because I have personal experience of either of them ever threatening to spin. I only drive on roads as well, so I'm hardly pushing it to the ragged edge.
I suppose mid engine is more exotic, but I wouldn't choose a car just because of it. I'm a real human with real life practical needs, so a usable boot is a good thing.
I prefer the steering feel of the best mid-engined cars.*
I prefer the benign on-the-limit handling of the best front engined cars.
* The anomally here being that the best steering feel I've experienced, bar none - and that experience runs to Lotus Elises, Elans and Europas - was the front-engined (but rear transaxle) Westfield FW400... but that's probaby a combination of the freakishly low weight, rearward weight bias, and design by an ex-Lotus guy.
I prefer the benign on-the-limit handling of the best front engined cars.
* The anomally here being that the best steering feel I've experienced, bar none - and that experience runs to Lotus Elises, Elans and Europas - was the front-engined (but rear transaxle) Westfield FW400... but that's probaby a combination of the freakishly low weight, rearward weight bias, and design by an ex-Lotus guy.
Thanks for the replies.
I will admit that there is a touch of intimidation from me when it comes to mid engine rwd, especially when I've seen stuff like Audi R8s/Porsche Boxsters etc binning them on YouTube vids for example. They look pretty unforgiving when they let go to me, and I think that you get a bit more of a safety net with a front engined rwd car in comparison.
I'd imagine that the overall grip in the right conditions is really good in a mid engined rwd car though(having the weight of the engine over the driven wheels for example).
I will admit that there is a touch of intimidation from me when it comes to mid engine rwd, especially when I've seen stuff like Audi R8s/Porsche Boxsters etc binning them on YouTube vids for example. They look pretty unforgiving when they let go to me, and I think that you get a bit more of a safety net with a front engined rwd car in comparison.
I'd imagine that the overall grip in the right conditions is really good in a mid engined rwd car though(having the weight of the engine over the driven wheels for example).
im undecided. i've swapped from a BMW e85 Z4 (FR) to a porsche boxster S (MR) for weekends and trackdays, and... im undecided.
the z4 was rock solid, most of the time. though - it had real good tyres on, wide fronts, and an alignment. it was very neutral in corners, i was plenty happy pushing on in it. though, it was still quite snatchy when the back did let go - the engine is very far back in the chassis for a front engined car, and the wheelbase is very short so it does keep you on your toes.
the boxster, by comparision, doesnt feel as nice to drive yet, but thats as much the tyres as the engine layout - its still on narrow fronts so understeers a lot. traction out of corners is possibly a bit better, but thats questionable. both cars feel much the same on turn in, really...
so, i'd say there was a lot more to it than just engine layout - tyres and alignment still make the biggest difference to how a car handles for me.
fyi, the reason i switched from FR to MR was because if i wanted to get something really exotic, i'd have to get used to how mid engined cars behave a bit more. hence a 3 year junior programme in boxsters.
the z4 was rock solid, most of the time. though - it had real good tyres on, wide fronts, and an alignment. it was very neutral in corners, i was plenty happy pushing on in it. though, it was still quite snatchy when the back did let go - the engine is very far back in the chassis for a front engined car, and the wheelbase is very short so it does keep you on your toes.
the boxster, by comparision, doesnt feel as nice to drive yet, but thats as much the tyres as the engine layout - its still on narrow fronts so understeers a lot. traction out of corners is possibly a bit better, but thats questionable. both cars feel much the same on turn in, really...
so, i'd say there was a lot more to it than just engine layout - tyres and alignment still make the biggest difference to how a car handles for me.
fyi, the reason i switched from FR to MR was because if i wanted to get something really exotic, i'd have to get used to how mid engined cars behave a bit more. hence a 3 year junior programme in boxsters.
brillomaster said:
im undecided. i've swapped from a BMW e85 Z4 (FR) to a porsche boxster S (MR) for weekends and trackdays, and... im undecided.
the boxster, by comparision, doesnt feel as nice to drive yet, but thats as much the tyres as the engine layout - its still on narrow fronts so understeers a lot. traction out of corners is possibly a bit better, but thats questionable. both cars feel much the same on turn in, really...
That's a curious comment. What's your definition of narrow tyres? My Boxster S has 235/35R20 tyres on the front (265/30R20 rears) and I think that's plenty wide enough. the boxster, by comparision, doesnt feel as nice to drive yet, but thats as much the tyres as the engine layout - its still on narrow fronts so understeers a lot. traction out of corners is possibly a bit better, but thats questionable. both cars feel much the same on turn in, really...
In my opinion, wider front tyres does not always mean better handling. In fact if the compound isn't soft enough, or if it's wet, a wider tyre can fail to adhere to the road surface and can actually understeer more. If the tyre is too wide, the contact patch is too big and the force per square whatever becomes too low. You need a certain amount of pressure to make the rubber deform over the road surface to create mechanical grip.
Current - rear drive rear engine - summer VW Bay - handing hilarious.
front drive front engine - most days - Alfa Mito rarely goes fast enough to worry about anything.
4x4 hybrid - longer journeys - Q5 TfsiE has the space and oomph when needed
Of the "sports cars" both front engine RWD, Cerbera was a dream to drive at any speed. RX-8 was fun and handled superbly but severely lacked low down guts.
front drive front engine - most days - Alfa Mito rarely goes fast enough to worry about anything.
4x4 hybrid - longer journeys - Q5 TfsiE has the space and oomph when needed
Of the "sports cars" both front engine RWD, Cerbera was a dream to drive at any speed. RX-8 was fun and handled superbly but severely lacked low down guts.
Edited by southendpier on Wednesday 18th January 16:02
Equus said:
I prefer the steering feel of the best mid-engined cars.*
I prefer the benign on-the-limit handling of the best front engined cars.
* The anomally here being that the best steering feel I've experienced, bar none - and that experience runs to Lotus Elises, Elans and Europas - was the front-engined (but rear transaxle) Westfield FW400... but that's probaby a combination of the freakishly low weight, rearward weight bias, and design by an ex-Lotus guy.
On the king’s highway a mid-engined car needs to be driven with more respect than a car with the engine at the front. But that is a generalisation. Not all FR cars are friendly on the limit, and not all MR cars have the same precise feel and turn-in. The OP’s 1980’s Skoda being a good example of a MR car that doesn’t have the same feel or behavior as an Elise. I prefer the benign on-the-limit handling of the best front engined cars.
* The anomally here being that the best steering feel I've experienced, bar none - and that experience runs to Lotus Elises, Elans and Europas - was the front-engined (but rear transaxle) Westfield FW400... but that's probaby a combination of the freakishly low weight, rearward weight bias, and design by an ex-Lotus guy.
I would say I prefer having the engine behind me. I’m too old to be playing with oversteer, but I will always love the feel of a well setup mid-engined car.
threespires said:
Front engine rear wheel drive for me.
Mid engine cars are boring.
They corner so well that twisty roads become straights.
There's no fun in that.
There definitely does seem to be a bit of a case of all or nothing with a car with a MR layout from what I can gather. If the road conditions are poor they seem to be more unforgiving(they can snap quite hard) in comparison to a FR layout. Plus when it is dry they are almost too accomplished and you could arguably say that they are a bit too composed to be loads of fun perhaps?Mid engine cars are boring.
They corner so well that twisty roads become straights.
There's no fun in that.
Obviously I don't have any experience of the MR layout...so I could be just talking out of my backside though!
Front engine RWD is much more approachable and forgiving hence more fun.
Mid-engine, you need your wits about you and quick hands if it goes unexpectedly so there’s a tendency to stay within comfortable limits.
Never driven one but rear engine is surely just wrong if we’re honest! I’ve upset a few Beetle, Imp, Skoda owners but never mind…
Mid-engine, you need your wits about you and quick hands if it goes unexpectedly so there’s a tendency to stay within comfortable limits.
Never driven one but rear engine is surely just wrong if we’re honest! I’ve upset a few Beetle, Imp, Skoda owners but never mind…
SpudLink said:
I would say I prefer having the engine behind me. I’m too old to be playing with oversteer, but I will always love the feel of a well setup mid-engined car.
I would definitely like to experience the feel of a well set up mid-engined car. One of my neighbours has a Porsche Boxster(I always hear/read good things about those), and I reckon that I should see if he'd be willing to let me have a go in it. 
Silvanus said:
Front engine awd for me please
Subaru says "Hi"Front engine RWD for me, although my classic is such, it is a bit of a effort to drive it and enjoy it these days. Front engine FWD seems so much easier in comparison when pressing on a bit. Then again, I'm no driving god by any stretch, so ymmv.
HustleRussell said:
Never driven one but rear engine is surely just wrong if we’re honest! I’ve upset a few Beetle, Imp, Skoda owners but never mind…
I was a very inexperienced driver at the time, but I was shocked at how quickly things got out of hand in the Skoda Estelle(made worse with it being wet/raining), and once it went I definitely wasn't getting it back!I was just chuffed that I just missed a load of parked cars and a lamppost stopped me instead as I was spinning down the road!
I've never driven as badly as that in the wet/rain since though(I had the Scud from 1990-92), so I definitely did learn from my mistakes to be fair. 
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff