Hi thisisntjared
I think there are two camps of thought about FE cars , and it may be that cars will split into 2 styles for the future FE market.
One would be the streamliners , which probably is the only choice for ultimate FE and speed., and there would be the Boxfish evolution from todays cars with FE practices applied.
I dont think full sized cars as we know it will ever be great FE machines.
For an interval time they might rise in popularity (and i think auto makers will go this way) but in the ultimate end when gas is super expensive I dont think they have much future going down that path.
Untill the power hungry gass guzzlin public re-evaluates their life and driving styles and realise that what they think cars are I think the makers will go with compromised versions , which dont deliver.
Also I think that auto design should start with the engineers and not with the body stylist.
Cars need to become good machinery and not fasion statements.
?it allows for a smaller frontal area??? that is a stretch and **might** only hold true on the highway.?
Seating position , headroom and glass have the most impact on the total size and shape of the front.
So far having a large FWD engine up front hasnt been bad because it wasnt the major problem - it suits the style of body quite well.
Assuming that cars became more aero seating positions would have to be changed and then the engine bay (pointy front bit) would need to be streamlined up and this is a lot harder with the shape and format of the typical FWD power plant.
A front engined RWD engine can be placed far behind the axles centrline if required.
It can be leant over also , which makes for a very lean front end , something that designers could work with well.
As you say , maybe it would hold true on the highway , do you think people are going to be driving slower ? ...I dont , I think even when gas is expensive they still will want to go fast.
So even if the improvments are only at high speed then that is advancement., but as we have seen in this forum with the small aero mods being played with , even at lower speeds they work.
?what about city driving? do you really think the added rotational mass will save fuel during stop and go traffic???
As I said b4 , with modern materials the extras weight is minimal , especially with smaller engines that do not require tail shafts that are required to pass a lot of power.
Using modern materials I think it would only be a matter of a few killograms difference between FWD and RWD and that the possible aero advantages will make up for that and more.
?think of all the larger 1000+cc motorcycles. do you really think one of those motors (and transmissions)?
I agree 100% ,
but if you notice they get the less size due to an intergrated engine/gearbox and this is NOT , the conventional auto makers way.
My point was that its hard to narrow up a car (to in-line seater etc) with the current styles of powerplants.
You may not have noticed but you just agreed with what I said.
The whole idea of giving up on FWD (as we know it) would be to give auto engineers more of a clear slate to work with and design.(ide like to see the engine in the back)
If public opinion and desires dictate to the engineers it restricts what they can do.
If they are held back then how can they push realy hard forward in the rite (FE) direction.
Because of this I think Boxfish style cars will become the FE standard , but I dont think they will become anything brilliant.
?
Linear Mode
