Weight Reduction?
- Thread starter CoolWhip
- Start date
FrequentFlyer
Member
- :
- 2008 CWP Mazdaspeed3
LOL
All this weight reduction really is more trouble than it's worth. This car is pretty light for a 4-door wagon.
AutoXRacer
Member
I estimated removing the spare and related tools will save you about 55-60 pounds. I remove mine at all my races and its made a difference between 1st or second place... It actually helps when you're down to .XX seconds. (lol2)
Wow! I didn't think that stuff weighed that much.
AutoXRacer
Member
Thats just an estimate; you have the jack, lug wrench, the toe tool, and the spare. Like I said, if you are looking for those extra .XX seconds, then it worth it!!!
I disagree, almost entirely. Moving weight back will improve almost every aspect of performance. It will certainly improve braking and handling, and I think acceleration will be mostly unaffected.
There is a reason that all high end performance cars shoot for a near 50/50 weight distribution. It leads to neutral handling. Nose heavy cars tend to understeer, while ass heavy cars tends to oversteer (my '76 911 a perfect example of the latter). Where did you come up with a light rear end lending itself to throttle oversteer? That's just plain wrong.
The bottom line is this; regardless of your drive wheels, even weight distribution is tremendously beneficial.
happy and angry
Member
The thing is, with our car you already have pretty neutral handling. Understeer is mild, and with proper technique you can get the ass out pretty well. And the positioning of our drive wheels actually makes a big difference in this case. We will, in almost every situation, want more weight up front.
Imagine a corner entry with you trying to trail brake your way through to apex. Everything we're doing is up front - turning and braking, followed by the drive out of the corner. If you shift weight back to improve weight distribution, we will have less weight over the front end, which means less grip. This will mean less grip to spread around between braking and turning, which means one (or both) of those things is going to suffer. We'll take the corner slower, or more easily exceed the front brake limits and encounter understeer. The same holds true for the drive out.
In most performance vehicles, with the drive wheels at the back where they belong, under hard acceleration weight is shifted back and grip is improved at the rear where the power hits the road, and under hard braking weight is shifted forward and grip improved at the front where most of the braking is done. Our car has the problem that under hard acceleration weight, and therefor grip, moves away from the front, where we want it, under hard acceleration. I am not sure that, from a track performance perspective, the benefits of improving weight distribution would not be outweighed by the loss of front grip on corner exits.
Look at after market suspensions like Cobb, by the way. The drop tends to be greater in the front, and the rear suspension stiffer to prevent weight shift back, and I think this is probably why.
Imagine a corner entry with you trying to trail brake your way through to apex. Everything we're doing is up front - turning and braking, followed by the drive out of the corner. If you shift weight back to improve weight distribution, we will have less weight over the front end, which means less grip. This will mean less grip to spread around between braking and turning, which means one (or both) of those things is going to suffer. We'll take the corner slower, or more easily exceed the front brake limits and encounter understeer. The same holds true for the drive out.
In most performance vehicles, with the drive wheels at the back where they belong, under hard acceleration weight is shifted back and grip is improved at the rear where the power hits the road, and under hard braking weight is shifted forward and grip improved at the front where most of the braking is done. Our car has the problem that under hard acceleration weight, and therefor grip, moves away from the front, where we want it, under hard acceleration. I am not sure that, from a track performance perspective, the benefits of improving weight distribution would not be outweighed by the loss of front grip on corner exits.
Look at after market suspensions like Cobb, by the way. The drop tends to be greater in the front, and the rear suspension stiffer to prevent weight shift back, and I think this is probably why.
AutoXRacer
Member
Miata comes to mind... (2thumbs)
- :
- 2002 22A P5 and 2007 TR MS3
All good and all, but in the end the MS3 is pretty heavy for a performance car....and loosing weight is a good thing...be it in the front or in the rear...
The protege Pwns the MS3 in handling....
The protege Pwns the MS3 in handling....
How do you figure the Protege "Pwns" the MS3 in handling?
- :
- 2002 22A P5 and 2007 TR MS3
Sorry I meant it owns....and cause it does....and that is an argument for another thread....
- :
- 2002 22A P5 and 2007 TR MS3
I'm no fanboi of the protege...miata pwns both...double time...
happy and angry
Member
Since when do numbers matter!?!(notcool)
since people can say anything and not have facts to support it
Ha-ha!, LReyes66 this guy disagrees with everything I post out of spite. Don't mind him
Similar Threads and Articles
