Max Heim wrote:
> One occasionally sees vehicles referred to as "front-mid-engined"
> -- the Panoz GTs fit that description. Probably in the days before
> "rear-mid-engined" was a concept, it was merely considered good
> weight distribution.
If just isn't Panoz phrasing it this way. If anyone recalls TVR's
advertisements from the 1970s, of the 2500M, you would remember that TVR
considered that car to be mid-engined. Apparently the Triumph six cylinder
was far enough back in the chassis, aft of the front axle line, to be
considered mid-engined. Purely a marketing ploy on words, it is still
"front engined" when you consider the motor was forward of the driver.
Kai
///
/// mgs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
|