carguy123 wrote:
And front mid is not marketing speak.
Mid simply means the engine is placed within the wheelbase not outside of it. Front or rear mid is only a convenient way to differentiate engine placement. Both are mid.
It is marketing speak. You know how I know? Because when Nissan popularized the term by going to great lengths to use it as part of the marketing campaign on their "FM" (Front Mid) platform with the release of the 350Z, they apparently got to define it however the hell they wanted. Thus they biased their definition of it purely for their own benefit, rather than using the logical engineering definition. In the years since, the masses have bought into this blatant marketeering ploy hook, line, and sinker.
Their marketeers claimed that front-mid means that the entirety of the engine sits behind the front axle center line. This is necessarily
incorrect if there is to be any consistency of definitions. It was however convenient in that it fits with their layout while excluding as many other competitors cars as possible. The
correct definition would be based on the location of the center of mass of the engine relative to the front axle center line. That's how the
much longer established (rear) mid vs rear layouts have always been differentiated. Otherwise, any transverse (rear) mid layout with a V engine would become a "rear engine" car if one of the valve covers so much as grazed the rear axle centerline threshold. Which would obviously be completely ridiculous.
I'll buy into "front-mid" being a legitimate descriptor as soon as the rest of the automotive world buys into using the logical engineering definition for it...Until then, it's is literally nothing more than an unfortunately defined marketing term that sadly took on a life of its own.