weight distribution

[TEG]

With the Roadster's 0-60 capability they do well with extra weight on the driven wheels. If they had AWD then make the weight even, but since they are rear wheel drive it helps maintain traction to have more weight in the back.
(At least from doing quick 0-60 runs without slipping the tires. From a slalom handling standpoint it would be better to have more even weight distribution).

And back to Mini-E - worst case is to have weight dominance on the non driven wheels.

 

[JRP3]

(At least from doing quick 0-60 runs without slipping the tires. From a slalom handling standpoint it would be better to have more even weight distribution).

Exactly, not to mention lower CG, remember the TopGear slalom video?

And back to Mini-E - worst case is to have weight dominance on the non driven wheels.

Like the majority of vehicles built up until the 90's, front engine rear wheel drive.

 

[TEG]

Like the majority of vehicles built up until the 90's, front engine rear wheel drive.

I guess some people like doing burnouts rather than 0-60 in 4s.

Although some like Corvette put a transaxle in back to spread the weight around.

 

[JRP3]

I guess some people like doing burnouts rather than 0-60 in 4s.

Not to mention power slides and donuts :biggrin:

Although some like Corvette put a transaxle in back to spread the weight around.

In the older Corvettes with a conventional motor and trans combo the motor is far enough behind the front wheels to give good weight distribution. Most dragsters have the motor in front, weight transfer on takeoff gives them plenty of traction. I think as long as you have the weight behind the front wheels, on a rear drive vehicle, you'll get good traction. Certainly the Mini fails at this task but that's not it's intended purpose. However it can deliver some massive regen.

 

[TEG]

Most dragsters have the motor in front, weight transfer on takeoff gives them plenty of traction.

Huh? From what I have seen most dragsters try to put the weight of the motor on the rear wheels.

Plus the front tends to be so light that the wheels lift off and nearly all the weight ends up on the driven wheels.
(bouncing off the wheelie bar in back)

 

[Tdave]

Huh? From what I have seen most dragsters try to put the weight of the motor on the rear wheels.

Two of those have the engine in front of the driver. Does that make them "in the front"? Still between the axles, so does that make them mid-engine? I don't know, and not sure it really matters, but just pointing that out.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Two of those have the engine in front of the driver. Does that make them "in the front"? Still between the axles, so does that make them mid-engine? I don't know, and not sure it really matters, but just pointing that out.

From what I understand mid-engine is just placing the motor in between the front and rear axle. There is no reference to the passenger compartment.

The confusing point is the general definition of front engine has become any car with the engine in front of the passenger compartment. Strictly it should only apply to cars with the engine in front of the front axle, like how the term rear-engine is still used. Supposedly there is the term "front-mid" to describe a car with an engine in the front of the passenger compartment but still between the front and rear axles.

On drag racing I agree with JRP3, usually the weight transfer from takeoff is enough for good traction, though I suppose more weight near the rear will make it even better. The problem is that with a front wheel drive car, the weight transfer is off the traction wheels, so a front bias is probably a necessity for good traction; a heavy rear bias just makes it worst.

 

[JRP3]

I guess it depends on the class of vehicle, but as has been pointed out all the motors are in front of the rear axle, not over or behind.

 

[TEG]

Well I think all the quickest ones end up "standing up" on the rear wheels so the front wheels don't really matter much. They are just to point you before you "unleash the fury".

Some of the "funny cars" have to resemble production cars so they end up with the engine mounted a little more forward than they would do if they didn't have those rules to follow.

That so called Corvette funny car picture illustrates how they would make a cartoon interpretation of the Corvette shape to squish the cockpit back and stretch the hood so that they could mount the engine as far back as possible.

(notice they go so far as to cut a hole in the windshield so it can sit partially back inside the cockpit?)


A stock Corvette has the engine much more forward, practically on top of the front wheels.: