I haven't over thought this. I started low, with a KISS approach in 1987 after five years study.
There are definite issues with mid engine cars one has to consider. And for everyone, I have proof.
I have studied cars for 36 years, and mid engine cars are a favorite. Death and carnage associated with the Mid engine evolution in the gene pool has been primarily European, but much like American history, its true advancement came when Ferrari and Ford got the United States to finance the perfection of the set ups. Once again, the new Ford GT and the 512 LM were as cutting edge as you could get.
There are other, much smarter 100% American based transmission solutions, but they cost big time.
I don't know how you could save a cent on 17 K and get a better result than the race proven ZF. Steve Saleen didn't agree, he got Randolph Austin Company from Texas to make one for him in six speed form from ZF parts.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7592571@N05/3273677226/
You could add height and centre of gravity, and get less dollars, but a mid engine car that will trip and fall under a Monte Carlo lane change.
See
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/saleen-s7-road-test
It's a pushrod engine with two valves per cylinder. That may sound a bit low-tech for a $400,000 car, but we're convinced of the packaging and low-end-power benefits that such engine architecture allows. Tally says the pushrod 16-valve layout is compact and permits mounting the engine low in the chassis. That also lowered the car's center of gravity and made room for a low-end torque-boosting tower of nine-inch-long intake runners.
"What kind of American supercar would it be if it didn't have a pushrod V-8?" Saleen asks rhetorically. It has more than enough power: 550 horses at 5900 rpm and 525 pound-feet of torque at 4000 rpm. "The engine makes an ungodly amount of low-end torque," Tally notes. "At 3000 rpm it makes 500 pound-feet."
Most amazing Richmond 5 speed gearbox with transfer case and Halibrand quick change, from a Kit car central LP500 ARMSTRONG
http://www.kitcentral.com/index.php?...95364f396673ea
https://sites.google.com/site/lambor...plica/1st-year
I was involved in extensive study of transaxle transmissions from 1982 to 1987, with the design of a mid engine Mitsubishi V3000 blocked, quad cam headed project for my Technical Drawing class. After 1987, each year, I re-looked at the options, and the front drive Lincoln based Modular v8 3.937" bore spacing engine looked especially good in 1996, but it pushed the width too far for my planned sub 69" wide car. It’s very hard to narrow the driven wheel pack down for the needed tire width. The Lincoln was an improvement on the 60 V8 SHO power plants, which looked okay with a 4.08" bore spacing.
The reality is that the mid engine exponents (Matra, DeTomaso, Ferrari, Maserati, Lancia, Lotus, Vector, Porsche, Panther 6, Alfa Romeo, Toyota, the Australian Bowell, Mirella and Triad specials) were constrained by transmission, the genesis, bane/Achilles heal of the mid engine car.
The problem with really strong, compact swaps (the whole modular front drive pack of the Lincoln 4.6 variants, the early THM 425 Cadillac/Tornado set up, the adoption of the typical front half of a 4 by 4 power train, the FF version of the Ford Sierra XR4X4Ti and Scorpio 4x4) were not so good for centre of gravity (cog). It’s a major issue for a powerful V8 in a mid engine car. It suffers the age old straight in under steer transiting to exit over steer, but the transition becomes savage when cog goes upward. Mid engine cars with poor torsional rigidity are worse, like the old Mungusta. The evolution of the mid engine car is one of creating strength.
The idea of front midships creates a problem, one of fire wall cutting, and a total loss of torsional ridgity. In Australia, the biggest percentage of early 70's Super Sedans had front mid ship engines, and they were dangerous, and a high horsepower fuel injected engine suffers fuel standoff, and major problem with engine fumes in a solar hot house...the drive compartment.
The Pantera ran a Ford Pinto rack and pinion steering system, it failed to yield the promise of low steering effort and sharp, high gearing. The Mustang II copied the Pinto/De Tomaso set up; the Fox copied the Mustang II revised steering of 1977. The steering geometry is another issue.
Connect With Us