How short is short? You must calculate the wheelbase length and not the length of the whole car (including the front and rear overhangs). The wheelbase of b-segment cars are not really that much shorter than a larger C-segment. The short overhangs on the b-segment makes it look like a shorter vehicle.

A shorter wheelbase car will have less chances of losing the rear and that is correct but you have to be so so so so so so so much shorter. The only thing that comes to mind is actually the Smartfortwo. That car would have very little chances of losing the rear as it drives like a go-kart. Other B-segments cars will lose the rear just as easily when you lose control and that is where VSC/ESP/ETC/ABC/123 will come in handy (but not a guaranteed) to help stabilise the car.

If the front is not in good condition, then all four should be changed. I believe that they are talking about here is in scenarios like this. You have 4 tires that is still good at 50%. You crash into a big hole and damage one of them. Since you have 4 at 50%, you can't just replace one tyre, therefore you replace 2. The question now would be where to put the 2 new tyres. This is when you put the new tyres in the rear and not the front.

You are giving a scenario like having 4 tyres at 15-25% wear left. If you bust a tyre with so little thread left on them, then it would be a better idea to change all 4. There is no need to discuss where the new tyres go since the thread levels between the tyres are so big that it would not be safe to use them either in front or rear.

They are more planted in a straight line ONLY. That is why tourers with long wheel based are meant for long distance touring. The long wheel base resist the change in direction giving you stability in a straight line. That is also the problem. To change direction, you need to overcome more forces and once that happens, the additional forces makes it less stable mid corner aka in the middle of a drift.

Short wheelbase cars are more nimble and that term is used because you can easily turn a shorter wheelbase car with less resistance. This does not mean it is bad as a more nimble car is actually easier to control while changing direction.


As for any mid-engine rear wheel drive car... the MR2 started what we call the '360 Club' as anybody who drives a mid-engine rear wheel drive MR2 would have experience at least one in a lift time... turning the car 360 degrees. That's pretty normal when you put the weight of the car in the middle between the front and rear axles.

Going up a mountain drive like Genting in a short wheelbase car is much easier and safer than a long wheelbase. You would know that if you have experienced it yourself instead of asking an engineer. The more nimble vehicle takes less effort to turn and change direction (esp in those left into right corners)and there is no hint of spinning out of control when the driver is in control.

When taken to the extreme, the snap-oversteer in a short wheelbase can be scary (that was what your engineer was trying to explain) but that would be more on the fault of the driver than car. Most snap oversteers that I have seen were due to an over enthusiastic driver entering a corner way too fast and trying to brake too late into the corner and hence unloading the rear tyres.

Maybe I should not use 'drifting' as an example otherwise everybody thinks that a longer wheelbase car is oversteering into every corner.

It's more about the feel of the car, something quite difficult to explain on the Internet. A longer wheelbase car is more resistant to turning. You feel that you have to work harder to make it turn and once it turns, it is more difficult to change to the opposite direction (for example if you are entering a left corner that goes into a right corner).