Front or Mid Engine?

Ferrari's are supposed to be exotic in engineering and style. Mid engined cars lend themselves to great style as well handling.

With the front engined layout its hard for the cars not to look like Camaro's.

 

I wouldn't mind..

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/4699/doubletedited5lz.jpg

But Italian

 

That car is too tall.

BT

 

Pick up trucks hold more than front-engined cars. So, Ford F150 or Ferrari F430...

 

The little Corvair pickup was pretty space efficient.

I seem to be fixated on Corvairs lately, wonder why that is?

Back on track - mid engine cars CAN be pretty space efficient - note the Cayman.

It is all a point of the design intent - I feel that Ferrari is missing something without a top line mid-engine 12 (I am not counting such specialized exotica as the F50 or Enzo). Especially since they saw fit to build not one but TWO front engines in that range recently.

 

While there are many awesome front-engined cars out there, over all mid-engined gets my nood.

 

Agreed.


We're talking about Ferraris, not Cayennes. Space efficiency? Come on.

 

I love mid engines

but my 07 Z06 is becomiong the perfect car after a few $Gs well spent and it has enough room in the back for 2 weeks worth of luggage AND she can outrun most Italian Exotics at 1/4 the $

I love my Z

 

Yo Will.

Did you ever get it dyno'd after the upgrades you had done?

 

William, that wouldn't happen to be the blue Z06 I've seen over on sc.net with a bunch of upgrades, would it?

 

My 550 doesn't look anything like a Camaro.
I agree that Ferrari should have a V12 Mid-engined car though. 612 and derivatives can cover the GT segment then have a mid-engined V12 monster.

 

Mid-engine for the track, no question. For the road, there really is no usable handling advantage with today's technology of mid over front engine, although mid engine might be more fun to drive because of balance and low polar moment of inertia advantages.

John

 

I have only owned two mid-engine cars: A 1986 Pontiac Fiero V6, and a 1986 Ferrari Testarossa.

I only still have the Testarossa.

 

The 430 is an absolutely great car. I've driven front engined sports cars, and most are akward, at least compared to the 430. The 360/430 is large enough to be comfortable, yet quick enough for thrills. I'd say it depends on the car, and it execution.

Art

 

Well many Camaros are better looking then other cars. Haven't you seen a '69? IMO it's a much more classic shape then a 550....and I love the 550.

 

Yes, thats the one

RIght now I'm adding 380mm Brembos, a Katech cam, and there will be some Penske shocks and other suspension upgrades soon as well as finishing off the interior in blue

Ernie, I did a Dyno back in CA

Will have to do another with the new cam

 

Why, oh why, did you ever get rid of the Fiero?

 

I am definately a midengine enthousiast but today it gets more complicated, I should be more precise, so I am a rear midengine enthousiast.


The S2000 is considered as a midengine car, front mid though ...

So this thread main question now should be Mid Engine or not, if so, front or rear?

 

1947-1974 road Ferraris were only front-engined 12's. They seemed to be reasonably exotic.
I like mid engined cars, but handling at the limits isn't always exotic.
71 Camaro was cribbed from SWB/TdF by Bill Mitchell BTW.
Front engine 12's street cars for me.

 

There is nothing like that engine sound coming over your shoulder.

Plus, in the world of exotics, Ferrari unquestionably makes the most practical. Have you compared the boot on any midengine F-car from the 355 on to one in a Gallardo? Ford GT? Carrera GT? For two people, the Ferrari has all you need.

Front engine does not mean less oversteer. Ask anyone with a Z06. It's setup that matters.

 

I can fit more stuff in my 512TR or 430 Spider than my 575.

Lambo's are day sailors , useless for weekend trips.

 

Well, I was too young, and she was too young, and...

OK, seriously: and part of this thread. Somebody above mentioned that there is much more to setup and the general quality of the car itself than the mere position of the engine.

Nothing could be more true.

Otherwise Corvair Corsas would be Turbo Porsches, VW beetles would be 911S porsches, and Mister Twos would be Ferrari 328s.

Just as a matter of interest, I have owned at last count about 6 corvairs, two Fiat 850 spyders, and at least 9 Porsche 911s. By far I have tended to buy rear engine cars. I like them very much.

Would it be heretical to say that the Testarossa reminds me very much of the handling of a large rear engine car? After all, a good part of that mass is up on top of and behind the rear wheels!

 

I personally agree with John...but for the track my rookie a$$ loves the mid-engine feel. Not to sure I agree that a 430 has the understeer issues someone raised earlier in the thread (I guess the earlier 3 series did)....my 430 is way more car than I can appreciate on the track...but appreciate it I do!

 

I've had both, both are great if taken for what they are.