pcutt

Greetings from a rear-engine guy! I hope you can enlighten me about mid-engine handling characteristics. For the first time ever, I've encountered a derogatory statement about mid-engine car handling characteristics (that's right, in this case they're not grousing about rear-engine handling issues!).

In this article about the Ferrari 308 GT4, which is mid-engined, the writer says, "It gives this five-speed, 2,923lb, four-seater a fair turn of speed and the handling on all-independent suspension is perfectly respectable, with a longer wheelbase than two-seater cars calming the potential for those scary mid-engined moments." I have long understood that the mid-engine layout provides for very predictable and neutral handling characteristics so I was surprised to see the negative comment. Any idea what he means? That the great handling encourages people to over-drive beyond their capabilities? Something else?

Thanks!
Paul

extanker

po got their scary moment because you never knew what you were going to hit...when you lose control they tend to go into something backwards.imho

zedcat

A mid engine car with more of the mass near the center compared to a rear egined car, if you get it to start to spin, it can be hard to catch and will spin guickly. I had an old first gen MR2 and in the wet it would spin like a top. The modern mid engine P cars are set up to understeer at the limit and feel pretty stable. I've spun them on the track especially in the wet. My 986 Boxster (no PSM) can be tricky. In my Cayman R if it's wet I leave PSM on (yeah, I'm a wimp) and it feels mostly neutral. In the dry with PSM off in the R you have to do something pretty dumb to spin it and yeah I've done that too.

ColoradoGT3

Well a Ferrari 308 GT4 is not exactly known as one of the best handling cars on the planet, and keeping your traction control engaged does NOT classify you as a wimp! Just prudent and smart...

If you own a Cayman, you DO have one of the best cars on the planet.
And in all likelihood you will not ever experience a "scary mid engined moment". But anything that quickly changes the momentum of any car of any platform can create a scary moment.

Oh, and don't ever lift off of the throttle mid-sweeper in a 914 to avoid a squirrel on a rural Illinois road....this also has been known to induce a scary "polar moment of inertia" !

inkatouring

Scary mid-egine moment, in my opinion, refers to the phenomenon that mid-engine car tend to be less controllable if they start spinning. Yes, they handle much better but a car with most its weight at one end or the other spins towards that weight, some what predicatbly. A mid-engine car, however, has nothing carrying the momentum in a particular direction -- like a top. Spin a hammer and it will be basised towards the head. Spin a ratchet extention and it will spin evenly.

jivemutha

On the track, I'm guessing you guys know what you're talking about, in which case all this makes sense. OFF the track, however, if you actually spin a Cayman, you've probably been violating more than a couple of laws (inertia, gravity, the cops, more cops, etc.).

About the MR2 comment, there was a defect in the rear suspension that Toyota took 3 years to figure out. Anybody needing to live more frugally and has to sell their Cayman, the MR2 turbo isn't a bad way to survive hard times, but make sure it's 1993 or later, or indeed you will be spinning . . .

Spokayman

This reminds me of a time when my brother in law (in his 1st gen MR2) and I (in my '83 944) would find some twisty roads. We would drive them and then swap cars to see how each handled.
One day, on one particular decreasing radius corner, I was riding shotgun with him in his MR2 and we snap-rotated very quickly in the middle of the corner. It might have been prompted slightly by a bump. He caught it, but was quite surprised because he was going 70 or so, and I could always manage 80-85 in the same corner with the 944.

jivemutha

I'm ignorant of 1st generation MR2s, but the engineering problem in the 2nd generation turned out to have a very simple fix: moving some rear suspension mounts an inch or so--no big deal. Nonetheless, Toyota reportedly fought for years to sort it out. The practical implication among MR2 fans is stay away from 1990-92 MR2s.

Also, Cayman owners, I suspect that no matter how down and out they might become later in life, would be dreadfully unhappy with any MR2 except the 2nd generation turbo (0-60 in about 6.4 seconds), which is way slower than a Cayman but still a fun car. And, like Caymans, they're usually rock solid and "have their motor in the right place." As you probably know, the next iteration of the Cayman will be way more like the Toyota--only 4 cylinders with acceleration provided by 'putting the car on drugs' (turbo). That was OK for the $24K I paid for the MR2T, but methinks a little questionable when someone is forking over $70 or 80K for a Porsche.

bldn10

"when you lose control they tend to go into something backwards."

When I was still getting used to a rwd car on the track again, coming out of an awd Audi that was foolproof, I guess I lifted a bit coming down the hill at Road Atlanta because the rear snapped around w/o warning and I backed into the tire wall. I think I've now developed the feel for it but I still have to be more careful.

BERG

As I see it the problem is that in a mid engine car, because the car effectively rotates around the center of mass and you are so closely positioned to that mass that the sensation of sliding is difficult to detect. Essentially by the time you feel it it, it's probably too late to do anything about it. Scary moment! If you have ever driven a Lotus super & or a Datsun 240Z where you are sitting on the rear wheels it is the complete opposite. Even the slightest bit of sleep feels like you are the new Tokyo drift king. My personal opinion is that this is a lot more fun to drive but doesn't have nearly the potential of a mid engine set up.

Pep!RRRR

I agree with the above assessment. My Cayman was no fun on the skidpad. I think I caught it once maybe out of 10 spinouts. My instructor mentioned that the steering is less communicative in the new Caymans. He was wearing an ear patch (for motion sickness) and probably needed it!

ColoradoGT3

So is an Audi foolproof, of course, no. But this has little to do with the car's engine or drive layout. Going downhill, weight to the front, rear of car higher than the front. Lifting off of the throttle shifts more force, or weight or momentum to the front, but more importantly less to the rear. The momentum is already favoring the rear to come around, and just a slight lift is enough to change the momentum enough to bring it around. It can happen in any car layout, but can be more or less amplified according to the car layout.

Remember that the same thing happens on a flat road, it is just amplified going downhill. If you are going 120 mph. on a flat road, and lift suddenly, the same damn thing is going to happen, irregardless of the car's engine layout. The momentum goes forward and the car loses that rear bias. So as they say, everything in moderation. Gentle inputs, smooth transitions. Drive on!

ColoradoGT3

Let us not forget that the very small wheelbase of an MR2 doesn't help at all.
There are a lot of factors at fault here, the mid engine layout is not the only problem that this car faces.

aussie jimmy

this, is all anybody needs to know.

Petevb

Early mid-engined cars in particular developed a reputation for snap-spinning. The very low polar moment of inertia combines with the short wheelbase to make the car rotate very quickly once it broke away, and the rear weight bias gives the tail momentum that makes it harder to recover.

To some extent this was by design: in the hands of great drivers this was an advantage. The Lancia Stratos won the world rally championship from '74 through '76 precisely because it was so easy to rotate. However when mere mortals drive the <86" wheelbase and tiny polar moment they often get into trouble: the Stratos requires extremely quick reactions and lots of skill to catch. The 308 is somewhat better with a 92" wheelbase, but it's still tricky.

Weather this propensity to rotate is a flaw or an advantage is a matter of perspective and where you're using the car. The "flawed"early MR2 MK II handling is actually preferred by more than a few drivers particularly for competition, however it certainly doesn't do wonders for insurance rates.

The Cayman follows the trend of reducing the tendency to rotate in more modern mid-engined cars. It has a long wheelbase, at >97", a relatively high polar moment due to decently long overhangs and radiators located at the extremities, and relatively little weight over the rear wheels at 55%. Thus when it lets go it's hugely easier to catch than the early racers that the author is referring to and made the mid-engined reputation.

The 944 is the polar opposite, if you'll pardon the pun. When it rotates it does so in relatively slow motion, as all it's weight is located out at the ends of the cars in the from of the motor at the front and trans-axle in back. Much easier for mere mortals with average hand speed to catch, but on the autocross course you'll feel all that momentum as you try and get the car turned in.