32 replies to this topic

[Michael Ferner]

The Cooper Mk IV was the 1950 model and was used by Stirling to win the Monaco Formula Three race. Harry Schell was runner up in another Cooper MkIV and after the Formula Three race the 500cc JAP engine was replaced by a 1000cc JAP engine and took part in the Monaco Grand Prix thus becoming the first mid engined car to take part in a Formula One race.

Surely Farina, Fangio, Fagioli et al raced a mid-engined car in a World Championship Formula One race before Harry Schell!

[Derwent Motorsport]

Surely Farina, Fangio, Fagioli et al raced a mid-engined car in a World Championship Formula One race before Harry Schell! 

What mid engined cars where there in F1 before the Cooper?

[Collombin]

What mid engined cars where there in F1 before the Cooper?

If we use mid-engined to be a more correct term than rear-engined, then we have to accept that many "front-engined" cars are really mid-engined too.

[Ray Bell]

Cisitalia?

 

Let's be serious about this 'mid-engined' term, it surely means that the engine is between the driver and rear axle...

[Tim Murray]

If we use mid-engined to be a more correct term than rear-engined, then we have to accept that many "front-engined" cars are really mid-engined too.

Agreed absolutely. I’ve never understood why cars with the engine behind the driver, but within the wheelbase, get described as mid-engined, while cars with the engine in front of the driver, but within the wheelbase, don’t.

By this definition the only cars classed as front-engined should be cars such as the Audi Quattro and Trossi-Monaco with engines in front of the front axle, as (presumably) cars such as the VW Beetle and Hillman Imp, with engines behind the rear axle, are classed as rear-engined by those who speak of mid-engined cars.

[WINO]

Tim, you are my hero, since I never use [or will use] the term mid-engined in my life! The term comes close to navel gazing.

[404KF2]

My two Renault 5s were both mid-engined and they were FWD.

[Michael Ferner]

Ian, Tim and Willem have already explained pretty much what I was trying to say (thank you!). The insistence of some pundits to call every rear-engined car "mid-engined" always strikes me as a bit daft - most every racing car is mid-engined, that's where the engine belongs if you want proper weight distribution: between the axles. I get that some (most?) front-engined road cars have their engine over or even in front of the axle these days, but you'll be hard pressed to find a proper racing car with that configuratrion (though a very few exist). I guess this whole redundant designation originated in the marketing department of some sporty car manufacturer to shake off the image of a Volkswagen Beetle, or perhaps even to give the finger to Porsche. It has no place in proper car talk, and certainly not in discussions about racing cars! The only sensible way to refer to engine placement is to distinguish between front and rear - in front of the driver, or behind same. What's wrong with saying "Harry Schell was the first man to race a rear-engined car in a World Championship Formula One race"?

[BRG]

What's wrong with saying "Harry Schell was the first man to race a rear-engined car in a World Championship Formula One race"?

Because it is inaccurate?

 

Carel Godin de Beaufort raced a Porsche in the 1958 Dutch GP.

 

Bob Gerard raced a Cooper T44 in the 1957 British GP

[Collombin]

Schell was 1950.

[BRG]

Ah, OK.  

 

But he obviously wasn't convinced about it as he didn't repeat the exercise for nine years!

[10kDA]

Pretty sure Toyota's factory literature and manuals for their MR2 refer to it as mid-engine. Ferrari 308GTB factory manual refers to central engine location. Who wants to tell them?

[Collombin]

Ferrari 308GTB factory manual refers to central engine location. Who wants to tell them?

They have form, calling one of their cars Berlinetta Boxer. As nobody in their right mind would really do a 12 cylinder boxer I assume it's the name that's at fault.

[kayemod]

They have form, calling one of their cars Berlinetta Boxer. As nobody in their right mind would really do a 12 cylinder boxer I assume it's the name that's at fault.

 

 

True, and nobody in their right mind would put the gearbox underneath the engine either.

[Alan Baker]

True, and nobody in their right mind would put the gearbox underneath the engine either.

Alec Issigonis?

[John Ginger]

True, and nobody in their right mind would put the gearbox underneath the engine either.

Saab

[Doug Nye]

They were relatively tiny - the Ferrari BB's was anything but...  

 

DCN

[kayemod]

Both SAAB & Mini are good examples, but neither of those two went as far as sticking a flat twelve on top.

[10kDA]

The owner's manual spec page of at least one iteration of the BB refers to engine location as "central/rear." I suppose the engine/trans configuration splits the difference in some ways.

 

Then there is the Pontiac Fiero 2M4. Pontiac explained 2M4 part of the official model name as signifying 2 seats; Mid-engine; 4 cylinders, though I don't recall anybody including "2M4" when talking about Fieros nor anyone referring to a "2M6" after Pontiac plugged in a V6.

[GTMRacer]

True, and nobody in their right mind would put the gearbox underneath the engine either.

 

Lamborghini Muira? It looks great but not sure it was the most practical of machines! But if you want a practical Lambo, buy a tractor...

[BRG]

 But if you want a practical Lambo, buy a tractor...

Like Farmer Clarkson?  

 

[Charlieman]

Whilst looking for photos of clubmans/1172 type cars, I found one of a Lotus 6 with no body. The radiator is on the front axle line, well ahead of the engine. There are some ancillaries in front of the axle line and the spaceframe extends to pick up suspension loads. Even cars like the Bugatti Type 35 can be described as front-mid engined, although torsional loads are resisted by fresh air.

[sabrejet]

This surely is an argument looking for a place to happen? The terms describe (front to rear) "engine-gearbox-driver" (and "engine-driver-gearbox"); "driver-engine-gearbox" and "driver-gearbox-engine". The words used to describe those configurations are well-known and may be inappropriate to the pedants of this world, but does it matter since we understand their intent?

 

Oh to be able to wind the clock back and derive those terms myself. I'd have gone for "fronty first"; "a*se backwards" and "the other one".

[D-Type]

I think we have DSJ to thank for this sorry state of affairs.  At the time he was driving a genuine (by his rules) rear-engined car, a Porsche 356 which I understand does have the engine behind the line of the rear wheels*.  He decided to be pedantic and take exception to those who described a Cooper-Climax, which was the car under discussion, as being rear-engined.  This is true in comparison with his Porsche.  As it didn't suit his line of argument he ignored the fact that every other Grand Prix car which he and everyone else termed front-engined should also be termed "mid-engined" except the DB that ran at Pau which might be "genuinely" front-engined as I think its engine may have been ahead of the front wheels. 

Such is the respect, and indeed affection, that Jenks' is held in, people have picked up on this and run with it (deliberate mixed metaphor).

 

 

* Note that I have deliberately not used the word"axle" here, as a pedant might point out that only a Dinky toy has two axles.

[Lee Nicolle]

What mid engined cars where there in F1 before the Cooper?

Actually there was many. Go look at engine location on most 50s and 60s racecars. And before. It was in front of the gearbox generally though many had a transaxle.

Quite a few sporty cars are actually the same. Though the seating position is well back. Engine behind front wheels. Or well back with a transaxle,, Alfa GTV style.

The only 'real' rear engined cars are cars like VWs. Porkers etc. A bloody great pendulem. And dumb!

Then you have the opposite in Audis where the engine is as far forward as they can get it. And dumb.

If you think a lot you can get a car with the engine between the front wheels fairly much 50/50 by moving most other functions rearwards. Ideal no, functional yes. This a racecar only.

[john aston]

This issue about nomenclature has always been a rich picking ground for pedantry .  But I think it's borderline disingenuous, if not misleading,  to call any car with an engine in front of  the driver 'mid engined' . Location is best defined by reference to the engine's position in relation to the driver , however close to or far from the driver is from the front wheels.

 

Front - the noisy bit is in front of you

Mid - it's immediately behind you , with bodywork/boot behind it 

Rear - it's right at the back , and the engine cover is at the rear . 

 

Easy . And I refuse to believe that any front/mid engined zealot would not raise an eyebrow if I:d told them that my new car was mid engined but the engine actually turned out to be in front of my feet. 

[Michael Ferner]

I have it even more easier:

 

Front - the noisy bit is in front of you

Rear - it's behind you

 

No need for any more complication!

 

[RCH]

Flipping heck! Talk about picky!

Front engine, mid engine, rear engine. We all know what we mean don't we? 

Edited by RCH, 07 February 2024 - 10:25.

[Doug Nye]

And can we leave it at this point?    

 

DCN

[Michael Ferner]

Flipping heck! Talk about picky!

Front engine, mid engine, rear engine. We all know what we mean don't we? 

 

That's exactly the point: I don't know what mid-engine is supposed to mean, it apparently means different things to different people. And it's totally superfluous at that. So, why use it, just to please the PR department of some manufacturers? 

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by Derwent Motorsport
What mid engined cars where there in F1 before the Cooper?

Bugatti 251. Designed by Gioacchino Colombo, this car had its straight 8 mounted transversally ahead of the rear axle-line and a variety of other innovative – or even backward – design features which added up to a poor performance at its single outing in the 1956 French GP.

[DCapps]

And can we leave it at this point?    

 

DCN

 

The horror, the horror...

[Bob Riebe]

The horror, the horror...

Now let's show our age!

 

OH, the humanity!