When building a car with the engine behind the driver, almost everyone opts for a rear-mid engine layout rather than a rear engine layout. Porsches are kinda the only rear engine cars I can think of that are known for good handling. Aside from Porsche, the layout is known for often the opposite of that. Rear engine layouts often have issues with understeering and then snap oversteering and the pendulum effect is amplified with rear engine. Despite this, Porsche seems to see an advantageous reason to overcome these issues and makes very good handling cars. Why is this? Why does Porsche use the layout that pretty much everyone else dislikes, and still make really good handling cars?
Because that's their selling point. Besides, modern suspension and tire technology almost entirely eliminates the RR layout's failures.
No, it took ESC to "eliminate" the issues of the rear engine layout. A 911 is like the F18 of cars, it's basic design is unstable and only really manageable with modern software.
ESC is not supposed to do anything if you aren't about to crash. The issues were eliminated by making 911 practically mid-engined by inching the engine more forward in every generation and also moving every piece of mass they could to the front.
They also have drastic tire offsets now (rear tires much wider than front tires) which I think is also a mitigation
And having massive rear tires. Every generation since the 996 has had 285 width or bigger rear tires. I think you can get 325’s on some models now.
The early, pre-69 models are referred to as the short wheel base models. Later cars had had the rear suspension pushed back. Underneath, you can see how far as the axles are angled back. The early 911s could be widow makers.
I had a 72 911e. It also suffered from snap overseer if you overcooked a turn and even thought about shifting your foot on the throttle. All you could do was keep your foot in and let the car dig in. It worked surprisingly well.
The biggest risk with the rear engine layout is that they want to flip around under hard braking. Really only ABS/ESC solves that for the average driver in regular traffic panic braking conditions.
Under regular driving the ass end isn't going to magically rotate around you
Wrong. Rear weight bias makes a car stable under heavy braking. Hard braking wants to lift the ass, having more weight back there makes it stable. The rear end of a 911 will come around if you are really inept at throttle control.
Only in a straight line.
Ok so what road chassis type is stable during heavy braking while cornering? Because it sure as fuck ain’t a FWD car.
You're way out of your depth here.
Ok buddy lol
That's not how this works, it's not how any of this works.
It is actually.
Do you push rope?
What the fuck does that mean?
On a dart do they weight the tip or the tail?
What you're trying to describe is snap oversteer, and only really happens when cornering at the absolute limit.
Nope, don't put words in my mouth.
Yup. Deal with it.
It's hilarious how so many people can be so wrong yet so confident about it.
You'd be the first to know.
Lift or braking oversteer are not the same thing as snap oversteer.
It’s only unstable if you don’t know how to drive it.
Just amazing.
Rear engine puts more weight on the rear (drive) tires, which means more grip, which means you can get on the throttle at corner exit sooner, which means you're faster down the straights. That's why they're rear engine, not to be safe lol.
Sooner, no, the overall grip is still the same and rear weight bias means more lateral loading.
Because that's how beetles are made.
They also have a mid engined car? It's also arguably the better but less iconic car.
Not for long, boxster and Cayman are dying this year.
That's due to a cybersecurity law which would require them to update the cars to meet the standard which isn't worth it for an old design like that. They'll probably continue with a new model that will meet the new standards.
Cybersecurity is the reason why they haven’t been available in the EU for a year now.
Without that law they would still be available in the EU this year.
The reason the model is so old though is because the new EV version is the next iteration they're gonna release when it's ready. Arguably the formula will still be gone because of that
Everyone commenting here are forgetting that with every generation of 911 Porsche have been moving the engine, gearbox and other heavy components closer and closer to the center. Modern 911 is practically mid-engined, which is the superior scheme and everyone knows it.
Vintage 911s had engine in the back because it was designed by a tiny company on the budget and had to be based off of VW Beetle. It also drives like crap. Rear is the worst place to put an engine in a car, it's just a poor engineering choice and they've been trying to work around it for decades.
Besides, 718 is properly mid-engined and superior to 911 in every way. It's being held back a little bit for marketing purposes.
Lot of front engine cars moved the engine closer to the center over time as well. It’s the logical thing to do
Audi still mount theirs out by the headlights don't they?
Yeah that goes way back. Lot of stuff doesn’t change over decades.
Hell, to add on to this they have flipped the placement of the engine/transaxle in the race cars to actually be in front of the rear axle making it a true MR setup.
Nice link thanks
The choice was made back in the early 1960s, and was based on what they done before, and the desire to have more mechanical downforce (ie, weight) over the rear wheels, for initial traction on acceleration. A few years past this, and advancements in other areas of car development would start making this a less feasible layout... but that was when the choice was made, and there were good points and bad points.
On the plus side, the car had a high polar momentum rear, with a low polar momentum front, making the back stable, and the front easy to point. The weight distribution also meant that the center of rotation was right at the front axel, making it very responsive. It was a layout that made it very easy to induce oversteer and is one of the easiest cars to throttle steer. Though, on the flip side, that rear end stability was only stable until it wasn't, and there would be little time to catch it once it started to move, and weight transfer in general could be hard to manage for drivers that were not familiar with the car.
But as early as the '60s, Porsche was already working to smooth out the bad elements (to an extent). They would extend the wheel base, then eventual make suspension upgrades, chassis tweaks, etc - a constant evolution on to what you have today (which, I would note that it takes a good bit more effort to rotate the 992 than the 982; while I personally prefer the older 911s, the engineering to get to now is pretty amazing).
They continue doing it because it has been shown over and over again, it is what their customers want to buy.
By fixing suspension design they basically paid Citroen to fix the issues. Hard to beat Citroen for suspension design. That’s also where pasm comes from
It's because the model came out in 1964 and has been in continuous production ever since.
Back in 1964 it didn't seem such a strange thing to do. Lots of cars had that layout.
The world moved on. But people kept buying 911s, and Porsche kept making them. And they kept improving them, whatever was needed to overcome the obvious disadvantages of the platform, no worries, do what you must. The car is an icon, people want it, they buy it, keep it up with the times.
And here we are. A modern person might look at such a thing and describe it as a stupid idea, brilliantly executed. But in reality, it's an old idea thoroughly modernized over decades of refinement.
In any case, this is Porsche's connection to their heritage. Whatever else they build, this car is the heart and soul of the company. It creates a direct lineage straight back to Ferdinand Porsche, or you could say it leads straight from him into the soul of a modern supercar. In any case, it's not just iconic, it's central to the identity of the company to the point that Porsche can't stop building it, and they couldn't build it any other way. Whatever engineering is necessary to keep that going, they'll do it. It's what makes them who they are, and that's what makes the company a legend.
They wanted rear seats. Rear-mid only works for 2 seat roadsters. In order to fit 4 seats you have to set the engine farther back.
Forward to the points already raised, you can build an excellent crash structure without the bulk of an engine in the front, see recent high speed crash on Nordschliefe.
Came here for SuperfastMatt, all hail the algorithm!
Tradition and people buy them. It's a stupid layout and Porsche knows it. They designed the 928 to replace and stop making the 911 because they knew it was dumb. But buyers revolted and demanded the 911 layout, so here we are with Porsche still pissing into the wind to satisfy buyers and tradition.
EDIT: Now consider Audi, another idiotic German brand that does the same in reverse. Back in the times nobody wants to talk about they made a cheap FWD car with the engine forward of the front axle. And now are still doing the same thing. Audi are still made with the engine completely forward of the front axle like a 911 turned backwards. It's silly and causes them to do the same weird stuff Porsche does, like some Audi have front tires that are wider than the rear tires.
I came here to make the same comment about the 928 but demand was there for the 911 so it stayed.
It appears there's little appreciation for the truth.
PS, it's really too bad that Porsche didn't do more with the 914. Those were fantastic cars in their day.
I have a photo somewhere from (IIRC) a UR Quattro with the bonnet open and the front of the engine is further forward than the headlamps, I thought it was a joke that people like Clarkson make but it is based in fact.
That’s the identity of the 911. Rumor is if they let the engineers go full crazy on a Cayman it would probably beat any version of 911.
They have know and admitted mid engine designs are far superior to rear. They even make a few.
Except their flag ship will always be rear. That’s their brand identity. People buy Porsche because that’s what they know. They will lose more from Che going their id than they would gain from better design.
Same reason why BMW insists on the stupid chin mustache of a grill and why ford will always make a truck, it’s the brand identity.
Only the 911. The Cayman/Boxter is mid engined. Others are front mounted or electric.
How is nobody mentioning that a guy named Porsche developed the Beetle? And the 356 that proceeded the 911?His company just kept continuing what it knew how to do, like GM still making small block pushrod V8s. It‘s as much a heritage thing for the company’s developers as it is for the customers.
Hans Ledwinka and Tatra would like a little word, too.
I think people already answered the question for the 911. It's tradition and brand identity. There are other issues not mentioned yet. For example rear Diffusor Design.
When Porsche tries to get really serious performance wise, they put their engine into the middle. Not only cars like the 918 but also the 911 RSR.
Rear engine helps them win the traffic light grand prix against faster cars, and their buyers demand rwd and manual.
Long live Porsche!!!
Because European brands are suffocated by ‘tradition’ 911 is a huge cash cow and everyone would stop buying Porsche if they altered the layout.
They do it simply because the market will punish them for change.
This desire for tradition will kill the European automakers eventually. The largest car market in the world is now China. And they want EVs and fast phones on wheels. Porsche wants to develop an EV to compete for that market but their traditional customer base hates it. They’re between a rock and a hard spot.
I was going to say exactly this. BYD is going to eat everyone's lunch. The world will electrify, like it or not, and the Western brands will be tethered not just to ICE but to specific layouts.
911 isn’t a cash cow. Releasing cheaper models is what saved the brand
It’s called loyalty
It’s mostly heritage and tradition. But also Porsche has been moving the 911’s engine forward over the years. It’s almost on top of the rear axle now…..not hanging off the back like 40 years ago. Also, the 911 they race is a mid engine car anyway. And they’ve been making the Cayman/Boxster for decades that are mid engined.
Also, that rear engine does allow the pretense of a back seat. Only small children can go back there, but a dog can. Your messenger bag can. A few bags of groceries can. A Cayman can hold more than people assume in the front and rear cargo areas, but in the cockpit there’s room for nothing.
They did it in their first production car in the late 40s, it was unstable in the ways you described but was overall nimble and fun to drive and became popular. They continued doing it and optimize. By now they have almost 80 years experience with the layout and there’s no one out there doing it better than them and no one with close to this much experience in doing it. It’s so deeply embedded into their brand DNA that changing it would probably cost them customers.
Its what makes the 911 the 911, and its hard to imagine people frothing and tripping over themselves to get an allocation for the privilege of spending $400k on a Cayman.
Plus, Porsches' racing history seems to sugges that the layout works well enough.
True, but in their halo cars and non-GT3 performance cars they place the engine in the middle. So even Porsche knows that rear layout for serious racing is folly.
Is GT3 racing not serious, though? In which their rear engine car is, and has been for decades, extremely competitive amongst both mid and front engine cars?
Seems to me that, if this layout was "folly", the CGT and 918 would have a motorsport history, or that Porsche would have gotten sick of losing races with the 911 and built a GT3 Cayman to remain competitive.
Edit for clarity: Do I think the rear engine is superior to anything else? No. It seems pretty clear that the mid engine layout has a higher ceiling, based on the entire rest of the automotive industry and top level motorsports, however there's no questioning that, despite the compromises, Porsche has engineered the rear engine layout into something that works, and works well.
I agree with your edit. I think you’re right.
The 911 may be rear engined, but only just. Over the years the engine has crept forwards and is now almost, but not quite, mid-engined. It's pretty much just rear-engined enough to say that it's rear-engined and no more.
The weight balance of a 911 is now about 39%/61% F/R, which is identical to mid-engined cars like the Lotus Elise/Evora.
The early 911s had the engine slung out behind the rear axle, now the engine centreline is pretty much on the axle centre.
Electronic suspension and braking controls solved most of the r/r concerns. I spun my G body more than once.
Because Porsche engineers are stubborn and they tried to do FR for a bit and nearly went broke
Tradition
If you think all 911s have begnin handling traits watch an exubarant drive of a 930 turbo.
You need to specify "911" and not "Porsche"
Porsche makes a little bit of everything
Because that’s how the 911 started and they want to keep the tradition. Porsche knows that mid engine is ultimately superior which is why the 911 race cars are mid engine and the Cayman gets neutered so it doesn’t out perform the 911.
Porsche spent many years tuning their electronic stability assistance to make their RR cars drivable by regular people.
If you put the 911 engine in the cayman, the cayman would be faster than the 911 lol. It’s because they’re obstinate
They don’t. They have a 40/60 weight distribution which is the same as any other mid engined supercar
Only the 911 is like that, and the people that buy Porsches can’t even handle the 911 changing headlight shapes, so a driveline change is completely out of the question.
That’s partly why they make the 718, and then have to hamstring it with an inferior suspension.
Because of tradition. They started doing it a long time ago and had the time to engineer out the issues.
Just pure stubbornness
Because it's a flattened beetle
"Zee Germans invented the front wheel drive car to help convince everyone that the rear-engine car was a good idea."- Old joke. Ever since they have convinced themselves that they can make it work better than anything else with their superior engineering and tuning. Cliff notes- they have done very well at it, but are still losing in the hunt for speed.
I would argue that Germany didn't invent front wheel drive.
Wasn't it Ze French with the Citroen Traction Avant?
That is the first mass produced FWD car
Because automotive deisgners across Europe were trying to impress Hitler with their idea for "the people's car" and those cars often ended up being rear-engined because it was cheaper to produce.
Ferdinand Porsche "designed" the eventual "people's car", VW Beetle (Porsche basically did what Steve Jobs did with PARC's Xerox Alto and stole a bunch of other people's ideas), with a rear-mounted engine, then he stretched out the Beetle and made the Porsche 356 (rear-mounted engine) and then the 911 happened (slightly squished 356).
All in all, it was a mistake decades ago with the 356 and Porsche double-downed on it so hard that it became a selling point. They've fixed the glitch in other cars like the Cayman but they'll never change the 911.
Source: used to own a (modern) 911, loved it and am not beyond thinking the engine situation was hilarious the entire time I drove the fishtailing shit out of it for many years.
Coda: The DeLorean is another car that was seemingly born out of a desire to make a car destined to be remarkably unreliable and was so shitty that it was a believable source of gags in Back to the Future. The movie also rehabiliated the car at the same time and now Doc Brown's line about wanting put his time machine into a car with style that was originally meant to be a knock on Doc Brown's crappy taste is instead understood nowadays to be example of his good taste.
I think there's a lot of butthurt Porsche fanbois in this thread downvoting the truth / science and I'm here for it.
Right? I put a bumper sticker on my 911, randos would get outraged, causing me to put more stickers on it. It's just a car, folks. A really funny and fun car that got surprisingly good gas mileage but it's still just a car. Why does everything have to turn into a cult on the internet...
(Also I carried a Christmas tree on the top of it and years later I was still finding pine needles right before I sold it)
Yeah the dick-measuring / brand rivalry is just stupid, all cars suck in some way or another, usually the more fun & interesting ones suck more - if we were sensible we'd all be driving Corollas and our spanners would never see daylight.
Definitely agree with you!
I traded in my (6-speed 996.5) 911 for a Chevy Bolt and that really seems to tick people off even though I basically have a zero maintenance car that's effectively free to drive...and the one pedal driving feels a lot like my 911 did when engine braking sooooo I don't see why people get mad.
EVs are dope and I'm glad other people hate them because it'll allow me to get a Porsche Taycan or Macan EV for practically nothing as soon as my second car bites the dust.
They do it because they're Porsche. They're Porsche because they do that. It's part of their brand DNA, their corporate identity, along with making the only non-subaru boxer engines and not wanting to talk about the 40s. Anyone can make a super car these days, but only Porsche can make a good rear engine. They have all the good tech for doing it right, essentially nobody else has it, and they make cars that feel totally unique to drive as a result.
I think an important addition is that they’ve been doing it for 70 years now. The 80s era Porsche’s are known as widow makers. It’s not that Porsche didn’t have this problem, it’s that they found the solution to the problem decades ago because they’re the only ones who continually try to make it work.
Don't ask Subaru about the 40s either.
From planes flown by kamikazes to cars driven by lesbians is certainly a strange redemption arc
While we're at it, let's not ask Ford about that time period either.
Ford motor co wasn’t supplying the axis powers even if Ford the person may have wanted too.
True
To add to this, a friend who was a manager at a huge Porsche dealership for about 12 years mentioned that when the Cayman came out, he talked to some of the guys in Germany as part of the staff training who said that during early testing they did actually experiment with a 911 engine in the cayman which was just objectively a better car (better balance due to mid engine) which obviously wasn't allowed because the 911 is the center piece of Porsche as a company. They probably have an internal policy that the 911 always has to have the best stats, or at least each trim level of the 911 and 718.
They can't change the 911 because of the heritage design, but they also probably accept that it is not the absolute most optimal package. I actually don't hate that fact, though, because the whole point of a Porsche is the unique design and how you can get into anything from a 356 to a modern 911, and they all have a similar feel (which is rare these days as cars optimize away their character).
And now you can get the Cayman GT4 RS with the 911 GT3 engine in it.
I'd still take the GT3 RS any day, personally.
Note that boxer engines and flat engines are different. The difference is in how each piston connects to the crank. In a boxer, each piston has its own crankpin. Porsche does not use boxer engines.
"Boxer" describes the movement of the cylinders, firing towards each other like two boxer's punches moving past each other in parallel. Each pair of opposed piston moves inwards and outwards at the same time.
Here's an article from Top Speed magazine titled "Why Porche Stuck with the Boxer 6."
Here's a quote from an Super Street magazine: "Flat engines like Subaru’s Boxer are nothing new. The design, which gives the finger to inline and V-type engines and instead incorporates horizontally opposed banks of pistons, was patented in 1896 and has since been implemented by Volkswagen, Porsche, and most notably, Subaru. The Boxer layout, which positions its cylinders in two banks—180-degrees apart from one another and on each side of the crankshaft—has been used on everything from commercial airplanes to bikes like Honda’s early Goldwings to cars as modest as Volkswagen’s Beetle and as shameless as Porsche’s 911 Turbo, with cylinder arrangements featuring as many as 12 pistons. In the 1960s, Subaru fully adopted the Boxer design, which today remains the company’s exclusive engine configuration."
Here's an article from autoevolution.com
A simple Google search will give you the answer. The difference is not in the piston config. The difference is as I stated above.
https://www.google.com/search?q=boxer%20vs%20flat%20engine