Almost like a city bus design, or like a giant tadpole. It would make it so much easier to see around corners. Engine in the back, driver’s seat behind a somewhat flat or maybe bubble-like windshield for aerodynamics.
For years I drove a van with a short stubby front end. It is so incredibly easier to control and have spatial awareness of the edges of your vehicle compared to the other extreme like a Mustang or Charger where you’re sitting in a bucket and can only see a foot above your 7 feet of hood.
I know some high end sports cars have the engines in the back, so I don’t think that’s a problem. But why not eliminate the hood altogether?
In: Engineering
The main reasons are driver/passenger safety, and maintenance/repair costs.
Having a crumple zone in front of passengers to absorb impacts greatly improves safety. It’s still an issue in vans or trucks, but less so when they’re bigger and higher than passenger vehicles.
Additional, working on covered engines is way more difficult and costly than engines with easier access. May be a trade-off for certain types of vehicles in terms of allowing more usable space in return for higher maintenance costs, or in the case of sports cars the deep pockets of a Ferrari owner.
But for the average passenger vehicle, the safety and cost trade-offs aren’t worth a little better field of vision… especially when things like crossover ride heights, technology, etc. can also improve vision without reducing safety or repair costs.
Latest Answers