Am I the only one questioning the front engine?

[caesarmascetti]

I've questioned the same thing. They are taking a huge step backwards when even the Vette has admitted that the performance was topped out with a front engine design. Look at the C7 and the C8 Corvettes. Close to the same power/weight, and the C8 is a full second faster in 0-60. And this stuff about 50/50 weight distribution is an old wives tale that makes good advertising. If that were true the 911 would absolutely suck on the street or the track. More weight on the rear not only gives better traction for acceleration, but better braking as well. And in a corner, you are braking for the first part of it and accelerating coming out, so the neutral part of the corner where you are just relying on the weight balance of the car is very small.

I can see Factory Five going this way to save on the trans-axle cost; that is a significant part of the build cost. Don't really blame them for that reason. But from a technology and state-of-the-art perspective, it is a step backwards. Like I said, even the Vette finally gave up on the front engine design.

Rick

"even the Vette has admitted that the performance was topped out with a front engine design," this was GM Marketing speak for we have to have a mid engined car to keep up with the Jones's. Performance was not topped out GM could have developed it further, as an example look at the Ferrair 812 Superfast has a 789hp V12, in a front mid engined design and does just fine thankyou. No IMO that phrase was right out of GM marketing, to make the Vette more attractive to those "sophisticated" buyers of european cars, not for any other reason. Let's not forget that 911s pre electronic nannies and 40+ years of development were known to be something of a difficult car to handle, many an early 911 especially turbos oversteered off the road.