DS vs ZF weight distribution

[CatmanV2]

There are so many other variables though. Tyres? Geometry? etc etc

C

 

[Zep]

I get that, my point is a car with all the heavy gubbins up front can't be as balanced as a car with half the gubbins up front, and half the gubbins out back. Unless an autobox and transaxle don't weigh that much in the scheme of things....

I think the point is that all the heavy gubbins isn’t at the front. With most cars of this type packaging means that the engine straddles the front axle. On the QP/GT it is what has been described at front / mid mounted, I.e. the engine is behind the front axle. This reduces the polar moment of inertia, making the car more stable. The auto box probably puts the mass of the transmission nearer the centre of the car than the DS box, however it is almost certainly heavier and these points may serve to make the car so stable it doesn’t feel like it can be hustled down a twisty road.

 

[rs48635]

yes - front side mid engined indeed. Compared under bonnet with modern Aston. The QP engine is way further back, the whole engine is well behind the front axle centre line.

 

[bigbob]

Forget what the numbers say, for me the DS always handled better even though I also loved my GTS Auto. There was a twisty road in the Peak District that I swear I was faster in the DS down than any 997 or GS

Can’t comment as never driven a DS QP. Mind when I’ve driven a MC GranTurismo it felt the same as my auto one but maybe the drive was too short. I suppose my point is all about whether we feel a change in our own cars when the fuel tanks are much depleted as the weight distribution change is similar. Must be something else..

 

[Motorsport3]

Rear axle weight bias is not uncommon to sportscars. In fact some of the best handling cars have way more weight on the rear (e.g. lotus elise from memory c.60%).