Just thought I'll move this discussion to a new thread since we were going off topic over there. (doesn't hurt to get some more inputs from other people as well)

Anyway, Zoom44, as far as I know, whether the car is classify as a MR (mid-engine, rear wheel drive) or FR (front-engine, rear wheel drive) depends on the physical location of the engine and the drivetrain(FWD/RWD). In a RWD car, If the engine is located in front of the driver then it is a FR, and if the engine is location behind the driver but in front of the rear axle, it is then a MR.

For other who are not familar with the "FF/FR/MR/RR" classfication system, The RX-7 FD for example is a FR while the MR2 would be a good example of a MR car ( therefore the name MR2 )

I believe the FR, MR, RR classification system is mainly for telling how the weight of the vechicle are distributed and therefore people can get an idea of how "tossible" the car is at hard corner.

I think I remember on the Japanese RX-8 site, they classify as a FR on the Spec Chart. Let me see if I can find that.

Anyhow, let me know what you think, definitely wanted to learn more about this "Front/Rear mid-ship layout" idea you were talking about. Thanks.

 

Mid engine is defined as having the engine completely between the front and rear axles. Therefore, all RX-7s and the RX-8 are mid-engined, in which case MR would be the correct shorthand. (calling the FD FR would be like calling the MR2 RR, technically. IMO, they need to replace "MR" with FMR and RMR)

There is confusion about this because before the relatively tiny rotary came along, the only way to fit a piston engine completely between the axles was to put it behind the driver. So people came to incorrectly assume that a mid-engined car necessarily meant that the engine was behind the driver.

 

i was just going to leave it at that but let me say it again:

if the engine is between the axles it is mid engined.

if the engine is over or in front of the front axle then it is front engined.

if the engine is over or behind the rear axle then it is rear engined.

until recently mid engined has meant to the public that the engine was behind the driver. but it really means between the axles whether the engine is in front or behind the driver.:D

 

the rx-8 is front mid-ship layout. it is front mid-engined, meaning the engine is towards the forward middle.
________
Fix ps3

 

What i am really wondering, after reading all this, is, wat does it matter? Do those classifications mean anything? Is your insurance going to change because its a FR or an MR? I can't figure out why this is such a big deal.

 

it does matter because it changes the physics of the car, it affects weight balance which affects how well you can hold a corner for one...also the car is easier to turn due to yaw inertia when more of the weight is centered as opposed to like a dumbbell like weight distribution.

then there's the ability to mount the engine lower if it's not over an axle, which lowers the center of gravity which means less body roll

hope that helps

 

So you guys consider the S2000 and 350Z MR as well? Interesting. I think of the RX-8 as front engined because the engine is in front of the driver. The RX-8 handles more like a traditional front-engined car than any mid-engined car. Calling it pure "mid-engined" is misleading as to how it handles and feels.

I like Mazda's more accurate description: front-midship layout.

 

The RX-8 is as "real" or "pure" mid-engined car as any other mid-engine car, they all fit the same definition. Will a mid-engined car with the driver behind the engine feel exactly like a mid-engined car with the engine behind the driver? Probably not.

Also, the 350z isn't actually mid-engined:

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadt...6/article.html

The 350Z is built on Nissan's new FM platform. FM stands for front midship and refers to the positioning of the engine. Compared to most front-engine cars in which a considerable amount of engine weight is placed over the front wheels, the 350Z's engine is located further rearward behind the front wheels. The engine isn't fully behind the front axle (like it is in a Honda S2000), however. Only the engine's centerline is.

 

Gentlemen,
Just wanted to thank all of you for your input. Definitely learn something new here. Also, Wow I didn't know I'll be driving around in a MR machine... COOL !!!!! Thanks guys.

-Smoker

 

However at this point the debate for this car changes nothing, it's already been designed. So classifying it as FR or MR now will change nothing besides your perception...quibbling over whether it is a "pure" mid-engined car won't make it handle any better or worse. The car is neither FR or MR, it could be argued it is either, or could just be left to say it is "front midship" like Mazda says. Either way, I'd rather see how it drives, not infer how it drives from a subjective characteristic that can be changed by lots of other aspects (suspension, tires, body weight, weight distribution etc.) I think those are a lot more important than a classification as FR or MR, they actually mean something and a measurment of weight distribution is indisputable, unlike this FR/MR debate.

 

This old classification system only requires the center of mass of the engine to be behind the the front axleline.

So the only rear engine car, Porsche 911
The Z and Rx are both front mid engine cars
Traditional midengine cars, Acura NSX Porsche Boxster.