![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
in my view.
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
Mr2 is an MR layout.
![](./images/smilies/spacer.gif)
Porsche is an RR layout
Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
shinny wrote:But please stop trying to argue that Marf is wrong in stating the Honda is mid-engined because he quite simply isn't.Heck, I even posted the example on wikipedia
(which you asked for) stating exactly that.
I'm sorry you haven't heard the terminology before or that your technical understanding of what front, mid and rear referred to was wrong, but please treat this as an opportunity to learn something new.
QUOC2008 wrote:
I m sure if we had the trd version with 500bhp and wider revised suspension we wouldnt complain.![]()
QUOC2008 wrote:
The driving postion, space and feel of the mr2 is soo much better then the s2000.
People always complain about the mr2 s bad nature but if you were in a f1 car would you complain about the snap oversteer, cornering n braking is hard at low speeds.
I m sure if we had the trd version with 500bhp and wider revised suspension we wouldnt complain.![]()
There is a big power difference@ the wheels and traction
between the mr2 and s2000.
.
.
thats why the mr2 will win in a drag race.
But cornering im still not agreeing that the s2000 is better.But out the box the mr2 with 195 tyres and the s2000 with 245 tyre has a big part to play in it.
gavsdavs wrote:
You do indeed live and learn, but please, for the good of the forum, permit people to have their own opinion.
gavsdavs wrote:
If I called ans2k mid engined in general conversation, people would almost certainly correct me.
Race Idiot wrote:
Honestly stock for stock I think the s2k would be better around a track as long as you had confidence in the steering.The linear power delivery would be much easier to handle than the slightly laggy feel you get with a smic on a tubby.
Also a stock s2k corners flatter than a stock rev3 tubby, mine feels nice and pointy now but it is no way standard.
Race Idiot wrote:
Although isnt the s2k one of the first few cars to have fully electric pas?
Marf wrote:gavsdavs wrote:
You do indeed live and learn, but please, for the good of the forum, permit people to have their own opinion.
You're entirely entitled to your opinion, and everyone else is entirely entitled to tell you that your opinion is wrong when it is indeed wrong.
No need to get huffy about it.If you want to hold an incorrect opinion that's your look out, but don't get annoyed when people point out that you're wrong.
shinny wrote:Marf wrote:gavsdavs wrote:
You do indeed live and learn, but please, for the good of the forum, permit people to have their own opinion.
You're entirely entitled to your opinion, and everyone else is entirely entitled to tell you that your opinion is wrong when it is indeed wrong.
No need to get huffy about it.If you want to hold an incorrect opinion that's your look out, but don't get annoyed when people point out that you're wrong.
I wasn't aware it was a matter of opinion which side of the axle Honda placed the S2000's engine? But hey, anything goes in this post-modernist world and the ultimate offence you can cause anyone is to say they're wrong
Race Idiot wrote:Good job on the slapfight guys![]()
gavsdavs wrote:
So every front engined car where the engine mounted behind the front axle is now just plain mid engined.![]()
gavsdavs wrote:
I think the vast majority of the world would not agree except here in pedants corner.
gavsdavs wrote:They would call it front engined.![]()
I would callef be a pub bore if I argued the toss
, which is exactly my point.