Rear-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive cars are common enough these days, but the front-wheel drive configuration is the most popular drivetrain layout bar none. The transverse front-wheel drive layout, that is. But what about front-wheel drive with a longitudinally-mounted engine? Could such a thing even exist?
Once upon a time, rear wheel drive cars were simply the default. You had the engine in the front and it sent power to the back wheels. But then engineers started optimizing for things like legroom and cargo space, and everything changed. Front-wheel-drive cars started to take off, with transverse-mounted engines used to maximize space for passengers and cargo. The benefits for the customer were undeniable, so the design took the mass market by storm.
Thus, you might think that every front-wheel-drive car out there has a transversely mounted engine. Take a sample of just about any parking lot, and your assumption would be reaffirmed. But it would be wrong—for a slim number of longitudinal front-drivers do exist!
Longitudinal Story
First things first, what do we mean by longitudinal layout? Well, we’re talking about a car where the engine is mounted such that its driveshaft is aligned with the long axis of the vehicle (i.e. front to back).
The longitudinal layout, also known as “north-south,” makes perfect sense for a rear-wheel drive platform, as the transmission sits directly behind the engine, and then sends power to the rear wheels via the driveshaft.
In contrast, most front-wheel drive cars use transverse layouts, also referred to as “east-west.” This is where the engine’s driveshaft is perpendicular to the long axis of the car.
This layout is prized for its compactness, as it’s easy to fit a compact transaxle onto one side of the engine to drive the front wheels. Designers can create a very short engine bay with this layout, providing more room for passengers and cargo for a given size of vehicle.
Given the transverse layout makes so much sense for front-wheel drive, seldom few vehicles go the longitudinal front-wheel drive route. Perhaps the only main benefit is that the layout can provide better lateral weight distribution, with the engine mounted closer to the centerline of the vehicle. In contrast, transverse layouts often have the engine mounted significantly off to one side.
Another benefit is reduced torque steer. With an engine and transmission mounted more centrally in a longitudinal setup, equal-length half-shafts are easier to implement, reducing torque steer greatly. It can theoretically make it easier to fit larger engines, too, though the combination of big engines and front-wheel drive is a rare one. It’s ideal for very wide engines, though, like boxers, or 90-degree V engines.
Meanwhile, the drawbacks are usually pretty obvious. You tend to need quite a long hood to fit a longitudinal FWD setup. You can also get a lot of understeer if you have the engine mounted a long way ahead of the front wheels. Alternatively, you can have the engine behind the front wheels in more of a mid-mounted position, but this will intrude on cabin space.
The Oddballs Among Us
It’s a a weird layout with few benefits, but that hasn’t stopped a wide variety of automakers tinkering with longitudinal front-wheel drive. Some of these vehicles you’ll find surprisingly familiar, others are more obscure.
Saab is perhaps the best known for its longitudinal FWD vehicles, which place the engine towards the middle and the transmission towards the front. This covered a great deal of the company’s models, from the 1960 Saab 96 to the 1994 Saab 900. The company eventually abandoned the idea in the mid-1990s, switching to the more common transverse layout.
This layout was also famously used by the Citroen Traction Avant, often referred to as the grandfather of front-wheel-drive. The Traction Avant had its engine mounted far behind the front axle line. The transaxle was bolted in front of the engine, which then sent drive to both front wheels.
In contrast, some automakers elected to put the engine up front, ahead of the transmission. Audi is a particular fan of this layout, and you’ll see it even on modern cars like the FWD versions of the A5. This layout can be particularly advantageous for vehicles that also have an AWD variant, as it makes it relatively simple to send power to the rear axle.
Subaru also effectively implements this layout in its FWD models. After all, the width of the company’s boxer engines would make a transverse layout impractical and ugly. It also maintains commonality with the company’s all-wheel-drive models.
You’ll find a similar layout in vehicles like the Renault Fuego and the Renault 21. In the latter case, Renault actually built models with smaller engines with transverse FWD. However, the company’s transverse gearboxes weren’t up to handling the greater torque of the company’s larger engines, and so those with the 2.0-liter used a longitudinal FWD layout.
@fastlanejezza Renault 21 Engine Layout ⚙️ #fastlanejezza #renault #renault21 #engine #renault21turbo #renaultengine #renault5 #renault5engine #enginelayouts #midenginerenault5
The beloved Oldsmobile Toronado fits into this category, too. It had a monstrous 7.5-liter V8 engine with the transmission mounted on the back and underneath the engine. It sent drive forward to a differential mounted directly under the engine, driving the front wheels.
Much the same was done on the second- and third-generation Honda/Acura Legend. Despite being front-wheel-drive, these models had long hoods and overall proportions more befitting a rear-wheel-drive layout. In the engine bay, Honda paired its C-Series V6 with a rear-mounted transmission, which fed a differential underneath the engine block.
Ultimately, you won’t find this layout in cheaper, smaller cars. By and large, it’s too space inefficient for such applications, and doesn’t provide much benefit in return. However, it’s still finding use in larger, luxury applications. It’s particularly useful for automakers that want to sell models with a longitudinal AWD drivetrain with a reduced-cost FWD version as well.
Hopefully, now, you find yourself duly educated on this obscure layout. Next time you see such a car out on the road, you can tell your friends about how it’s got a longitudinal FWD drivetrain and why that’s strange. Though, if they’re not car enthusiasts, you’ll probably need to explain the whole thing from the beginning. Feel free to point them to this article if so.
[Ed note: The first V4 Ford Taunus was also front-drive longitudinal engine, as was pretty much all two stroke DKWs. -DT/JT/Matt]
[Second ed note: As SWG and some of you lovely commenters noted, we should not forget about the Chrysler LH Cars!
Front engine V6, front-wheel drive! -DT]
Image credits: Audi, Saab, Oldsmobile, Citroen, Honda, Lewin Day, TTTNIS, JDM Auto Parts USA, Diagrams – Jason Torchinksy
“First things first, what do we mean by longitudinal layout? Well, we’re talking about a car where the engine is mounted such that its driveshaft is aligned with the long axis of the vehicle (i.e. front to back).”
No. It’s a longitudinal engine if the crank axis is aligned with the long axis of the car.
The orientation of the driveshaft/propshaft is a transmission layout issue.
I’ve worked on a few REEVs which were longitudinal ICE with just a generator bolted to the end of the block.
It doesn’t really count, but I’ve seen a few 4-wheel-drives crawling along on their front wheels and dragging a broken driveshaft to the rear wheels.
Pretty sure all the front drive Alvis and Miller race cars in the 1920s were longitudinal engined, the idea has been around for a very long time
The Cord L-29 pre-dated the Traction Avant by ~5 years, getting the drivetrain layout from an ex-Miller engineer, straight-8 sitting behind a 3-speed auto.
Ruxton was around, too, but they were more of a financial scam than a serious automotive company
The difference between Cord L-29 and Citroën Traction Avant is the position of the gearbox.
Citroën Traction Avant has a gearbox in front of differential gear.
In Cord L-29, the gearbox is positioned between the engine and differential gear. With engine “so far” back from the front axle, L-29 had poor hill-climbing abilities due to the weight shifting back further, “lightening” the load on the front wheels. Cord rectified this deficiency by positioning the gearbox ahead of differential gear for its 810/812.
Cord never had automatic gearboxes for either L-29 and 810/812. 810/812 used the “pre-selector” shifting mechanism that shifted to the selected gear when the clutch is depressed. This requires the driver’s input so it’s not considered an automatic gearbox at all.
Doh! I read “3-speed transmission” on Wikipedia and for some reason interpreted it as an auto. I’ve drive 3-spd manuals, so I should know better.
Fun-Fact: Miller FWD racing cars had transverse-mounted gearboxes.
This whole article and conversation just reminds me of the Grand Tour episode where the trio wondered how no car has been named after fish, then they recalled several cars named after fish and came to conclusion that all the cars are named after fish.
And btw, I’ve had two fwd cars with longitudinal drivetrains: VW K70 and Renault 6!
…I’m obliged to point out that the description of the Saab 900 engine and transmission layout above is incorrect. It’s *far* wackier than described. Rather than being ‘longitudinal engine, transmission in front’ it’s ‘longitudinal engine, transmission *beneath*’.
At the front of the engine is the crank, driving a chain which feeds power to the input shaft of the transmission, with the half-shafts coming out of the transmission further back toward the cabin almost in line with the rear-most cylinder (notice the position of the wheels on an OG900 relative to the front of the car).
However, unlike a Mini where the engine and transmission share the same oil, the Saab motor and transmission are independently oiled units.
Sounds like the Toranado / Eldorado / GMC motor home setup but in reverse.
Not to harp on Lewin’s technical faux pas, but isn’t the only thing behind the engine of the El-Toranado the torque converter? The gears are in the cylindrical piece next to the oil pan, between the drive-chain and the diff, right?
I’m not wildly familiar with the Tornado set-up, but as I understand it, that engine and trans sit sort of side-by side, and the motor and transmission each have their own oil pan?
That seems… flagrantly extravagant. Typical American decadence, things of that nature. In the spirit of Swedish minimalism, the top of the 900’s gearbox housing *is* the engine’s oil pan.
In the autos the torque converter sits between the engine and the chain drive, and that hardware creates an impression that the transmission is mounted proud of the engine (the inverse of an early Tercel). But in this diagram you can see how the guts of the gearbox and the diff sit almost entirely inside the section of the housing that forms the lower part of the motor’s crankcase: https://shorturl.at/2dOMb
Ultimately, you won’t find this layout in cheaper, smaller cars
[Toyota Tercel enters the chat]
https://www.theautopian.com/heres-five-important-things-you-should-know-about-the-1983-1988-toyota-tercel-4wd/
Agree! and the Triumph that proceeded the Tercel layout. https://jalopnik.com/why-the-humble-tercel-is-one-of-the-most-brilliantly-un-1823598285
A great side point is it gave the 4wd wagon 50/50 weight distribution for Rally Wagon symetrical fun through the dirt chicanes!
Been there, done that!
Came to mention the Tercel also! Great car.
How about (steam!) engine in front of a single wheel, and no transmission connecting the crankshaft to the wheel, and for that matter no crankshaft! In 1770!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas-Joseph_Cugnot
Oh man, how can you forget the front transverse engine with a longitudinal transmission layout? Especially if it was a straight eight cylinder engine? With the power taken off the engine’s center between cylinders 4 and 5 just like a Mercedes Benz Grand Prix car? Still not ringing any bells?
May I present the Ford Tempo T-Drive.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotive-history/when-fords-t-drive-missed-a-beat-others-picked-up-the-tempo/
I was really excited by this, I love straight 8 engines
I love how a straight eight can idle at about 300 RPM.
But– c R a N k W h I p !!!
That’s why they took the power off the center of the crank. That way no more crank whip than a four cylinder engine.
Ah, I’ve owned three- a ’76 Dasher, a ’85 Audi 5000, and a ’97 Intrepid.
The Audi was memorable for having a big 5 with the timing cover jammed right up against the bumper, forcing the small radiator off to the driver’s side.
I had two (!) 1988 Audi 5000s. I remember that little radiator and the extremely powerful fan that sounded like a jet engine when sitting in traffic in the summer. The car never had any cooling system issues, however.
Yeah, mine either, but the truth is that I never drove mine in the hottest weather because the A/C was fakakta.
The later VW Fox’s imported from Brazil shared the same layout as well.
I have had 2 Audis with this layout, a 1973 100LS and a 1982 Coupe, which was a 4000 coupe with a 5 cylinder and 5 speed manual. It was fwd but looked like the Quatros of the era. And later a 1998 Passat.
Probably worth a mention that Lancia inspired the whole ‘longitudinal flat-four, FWD’ thing before Subaru took the idea and ran with it to today.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7e/a0/d8/7ea0d8b3a5c61fa0f1d8d06448b9d777.jpg
The car you show appears to be a V4, not a flat-four.
Whoops, you’re absolutely correct! The later Flavia had the flat, not the smaller Fulvia.
The Saab 96 had the engine in front of the transmission. As did the Saab 93 going back to the 50s. They largely copied the layout and engine design from DKW
https://www.lanemotormuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/saab_93b_1958web4.jpg
How can we forget the Cord?
1929 Cord L29 was the 1st American car with FWD. It had a longitudinally mounted engine. The 1936 Cord 810 built on that, and added independent front suspension.
J. Walter Christie’s FWD cars were much earlier than the L29, dating back to 1904, although he preferred transverse engines (including a V4):
https://justacarguy.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-christie-front-wheel-drive-race-car.html
Sorry, should have said the Cord L29 was the first American car with FWD and a longitudinally mounted engine available for purchase.
Harry Miller did it in 1924.
Yes! Harry Miller front drive cars raced at Indianapolis for 25 years, but you left out the best part. They had longitudinal engines with transverse gearboxes in front of the engine.
…from the 1960 Saab 96 to the 1994 Saab 900.
Earlier than that, as the longitudinal configuration was adopted with the introduction of the three-cylinder 1956 Model 93. The earlier Model 92, however, has a transverse two-cylinder engine.
While you mentioned Renault, you left out their significant history in front drive. The Renault 16, first French winner of the European Car of the Year Award, started shipping in 1965. It was longitudinal with the transmission in front.
My first new car was a 1972 Renault 12, a car I wish I still had today. It had an engine-ahead-of-transmission design, was well-balanced, and handled fantastically well.
The Renault 15, 17, and 17 Gordini (my second new car) all had the same setup. In fact, you could swap parts at will.
Also, the Olds Toronado was not the only full-size FWD car. I had a “bustle-back” 1982 Cadillac Seville that was not only longitudinal FWD it was also a diesel. Of course, it did share the drive train with the old Toronado. It was also a POS.
Also Renaults 4, 5 and 6 were made with longitudinal configuration with the transmission in the front. 4s and 6s gear lever setup looks pretty funny at the dirty side of the firewall too.
Great to hear of another R12 owner. I liked mine but they were quite rare in the US South so I had to maintain on my own.
I bought mine right after I was married, from a dealer in Orlando who had only one.
I bought only Renaults for many years, finally giving up on my R17 Gordini only after the local dealer couldn’t get any parts for it. That was the perfect car, and the seats were out of this world.
That is interesting. I bought mine used in the mid 80s in the Tampa area. It was a US-spec blue 12TL with black interior.
The Triumph 1300 and 1500 models were longitudinal FWD, as the chassis had been designed for the potential of 4WD. The 4WD drivetrain was built, but only used in a small Israeli pickup – the Autocars Dragoon.
https://classics.honestjohn.co.uk/features/curiosities/curios-autocars-dragoon/
The higher cost of the 1300 meant it wasn’t a viable replacement for the Herald, so they swapped out the FWD running gear for RWD in the early 70s to make the Toledo and Dolomite.
It was this one. https://www.imcdb.org/v781939.html
We had a proper Saab in the family for a while and I did find it pretty freaky to find longitudinal FWD the first time I worked on it but I figured that’s Saab for you, they had their reasons. The clutch being mounted just behind the rad also seemed odd but Saab. I had a 93 for a bit, had to go. Too much Vauxhall, not enough Saab.
I’ll expect a followup on all the front engine RWD models with a transverse layout.
Seriously, if there ever was one I’d love to know the justification.
Well… do motorcycles count?
If the engine is between the front axle and the rear axle it’s mid-engined, not front.
So it’d have to be a pretty unusual motorcycle.
LOL good point!
Another oddball:
The inline-5 Honda/Acura Vigor and Honda Inspire twins of the early 1990s – followed by the Honda Sabre/Inspire/Vigor/Acura TL of the later 90s
But lets not forget the FWD car that predated the Citroen by 5 years: The Cord L29 with it’s Lycoming Straight 8, which was then followed by the inspiration for the Toronado: The Cord 810/812
I also thought these were odd cars to leave out.
An I5 in the 90’s … Prime Autopian material.
The B5 generation Passats (and their Audi platform mates) also used this layout, which made sense as those cars offered AWD as well. And they were offered with quite the range of engines too, a 1.8T, a V6, a W8, and at least one diesel option, on the VW side, in the US alone. Not sure what engines they offered in Audis or in Europe on the same platform though.
The first Gen Passat/Dasher was longitudinal, as it was based on the Audi 80/Fox
So was the B2 Passat/Quantum – but not the B3 or the B4
I remember my friend in HS telling me he got a Passat with a W8 engine. Since he wasn’t a car guy, I assumed me meant V8. Imagine my surprise when I opened the hood and found that, indeed, it had a W8 and it was longitudinally mounted and FWD and somehow didn’t seem to have any torque steer!
That was a pretty cool car.
All W8 Passats were 4motion/AWD/basically Quattro which would explain the lack of torque steer.
And VAG has been using this layout since the 70s on B and C chassis cars. Especially on anything that shared a platform with a Quattro/AWD version. It was really easy to just swap the transaxle with one that didn’t have a center diff and all the packaging up front was otherwise the same.
Oh maybe his was AWD then. It’s been so long I’ve forgotten the details. That would definitely explain why there was no torque steer!
Back before OEMs largely figured out torque steer, there was a definite benefit in the equal length driveshafts and—as there still is—in servicing (especially older V6s in New England because guess which exhaust manifold is the one that needs work seemingly 90% of the time? Yes, the back one and, yes, studs will snap from corrosion). Growing up around Saabs and Subarus in a time when RWD was the common drivetrain and having an affinity for odd cars, transverse FWD has always seemed more odd to me with packaging prioritized over driving and servicing and I just don’t care for the asymmetry of it. Now it’s common even with AWD (usually part-time reactive garbage).
I don’t remember the specifics but I read an article many moons ago about the lengths Toyota went through to smooth over the transition to FWD in the Tercel? Corolla? and it included a longitudinal FWD layout for a bit.
Yup the original Starlet was a longitudinal FWD. In that case it seems to have been done for two reasons, to use much of an existing chassis design and to make AWD easier.
No, the Starlet, at least in the USA, was RWD. Apparently, Toyota switched to FWD at the same time they discontinued importing it, here, in 1987. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Starlet
Sorry, yes I meant to say Tercel which used some of the Starlet’s front structure.
All the Chrysler LH cars ran with a longitudinal FWD layout. My folks had a 1996 Concord and for such larger car it drove remarkably well from what I remember, surprisingly light on its feet. Much better than the hand-me-down Taurus that I was driving at that point.
I came here to post that the Intrepid used that layout. My mother had an Intrepid R/T, and is was a pretty nice car for the time.
I might be wrong, but that was a design continuance from the Eagle Premier aka Dodge Monaco, which itself was a modified Renault 25. So the LH cars had a longitudinal engine because… Renault.
That was definitely a part of it, but another big driver is that they planned an AWD and RWD version of the car neither of which made it into production. If you look under the back of those LHs you can see the hole where the rear diff was intended to be mounted.
We had an LHS and popping the hood made me go WTF. First time I ever saw or heard of longitudinal FWD.
They’re just the thing if you want a donor for a homebuilt mid engine sports car or dune buggy!
In the 70’s and at least into the 80’s when there was a company that made a frame section to use the Toronado/Eldorado set up in your rear/mid engine custom.