Chad beat me to it. You 2 are WRONG The 2 seater is already 44 rear 56 front. You reckon making it 41 rear and 59 front is going to make it better ?? LMAO, it aint Who told you that ?? Better not listen too closly to them again. Why do you think they make mid engined cars ?? The driver is sitting in the middle of the floor pan and you will also note the fuel tank is in front of the axel on a 2 seater IE: almost equal wheel loading front to rear. It is NOT WHERE CLOSE TO 50/50 with a driver in it My road car handles heaps better on the track if I leave all the stereo stuff and the spare wheel in the back on a track day. Night and day difference.
Can you be more clear on HOW is it better ? or is it your imagination ? no offence before i started removing weight from my car it felt more smoother when driving and as i started to remove weight over time the car started getting rougher and rougher everytime BUT the handeling and responce of the car improoved dramaticly as i removed the weight
yes but where are you testing your assumptions? On the road or on the track? Tektrader is talking about on the track. If you can get your car to go fast enough to lose traction, then we'll see who's laughing. Sure, my car feels faster with a mostly empty tank of fuel and no spare tyre, but it doesn't handle more. And i'd had mine on the track, in the wet. Almost full tank and space saver and it held a lot better through the corners
Lets not forget that tyres play a big roll as well there with your car having traction on the wet ZedEx Im talking about real world assumptions meaning the road and not track but if you think about it the road test's a car's traction and suspention better then track becouse a track has smooth surface's but on the road you name it you will find it (im not saying to speed on public roads) so if a car has good handeling and traction on the road im sure it will be no slouch on the track either
you're certainly right retrozx, a big gold star for you today. However this is not the point, the point is CONTROL on the EDGE. The wet just brings the point of the control in a lot tighter than in the dry. Ie you can lose it doing 70 kms round a bend as opposed to 120 or more in the dry. More weight in the back, sure I lost it a couple of times still but I could feel WHEN i was losing it and could often correct. A car being TOO nimble: read, twitchy: is NOT a good thing IMO, before you realise it you're facing the competitors coming towards in midway through a corner And no, the road is not a good test of a cars suspension set up. Yes conditions are usually worse than on a racetrack, on a the road you aren't pushing the car to the limits (well, you shouldn't be). Not to the absolute limits. Limits aren't 20 kms over the recommended speed limit on corners, limits are right to the point that you could go flying over the edge. On a racetrack there are sand traps, on the road there are trees
There is just to many factors that play ther roll here and we will be here all night BUT at the end of the day and i stick by that is that LIGHTER IS BETTER even if the weight distribition is not 50/50
i guess we'll have to call it even then if we can't agree. Real experience vs no experience, widely accepted and proven theory vs no logical theory Cheers :zlove:
With the rear of the car lightened up by taking out the spare and all the stereo equipment. The back of the car under braking is extremely active to the point where it almost tried to over take the front. In fact at the bottom of the main straight at Winton. I can hang the rear of the car out very wide and lose a lot of traction. Same track, same car with all the weight back in. Braking is piles better. The car feels glued to the track corners are predicatable and traction isnt a concern. Track times are 1-2 sec a lap faster with the weight in. Keep in mind the track surface is perfect. A road is considerably worse. Any bumps mid corner will throw a lightly weighted car rear off line oversteering you into a tree. Guess why the V8 utes are way slower than V8 super cars despite having almost the same engines. Its all about handling. The utes SUCK. Mid engined cars are that way for a reason. 50/50 weight distribution. The UAS 2+2 slotcar actually has 8KG of lead bolted to the passenger rear to help with weight distribution. The carbon hatch and plexiglass window is a good idea only cause you can put it on and then add lead to the back of the car lower down and closer to the road to enhance handling by lowering the centre of gravity. Prob wint weigh any less after that though.
From my understanding heavy car rely's on tyres to get traction and get those tyres stuck on the road but a lighter car rely's more on the suspention to get traction
not when the car is unbalanced with a heavy nose and empty tray. seriously, think ute with empty tray. that's what your zed will become.
Heres a simple test of physics Tie a brick to a string and drag it around, then do the same with a plastic drink bottle. You'll notice the lighter plastic bottle will bounce around and slide sideways whilst the brick will only go in the direction its pulled. By taking so much weight out of your back end, you'll loose rear end traction both forward and sideways. Drivng on the road you'll notice more bounce in the rear (Like a Ute) and my loose it easier round corners in the wet (Like A ute). You may even notice more axle tramp.
Also by loading more weight towards the front decrease braking efficiency dramatically as the front brakes have to work harder. It's better to take weight out from the front
You have a point but the plastic botle will be easyer to pull stop and maneuver around then the brick , as for comparing a ute to a zed the utes are alot longer so that would make them loose traction easier.
Front brakes allways have to work harder since all the rear load from the car gets transmited to the front under braking thats why nearly all the cars have bigger front brakes so its not a bad thing to have a bit lighter rear end
Honestly dude people are giving you good advice and you're blatantly ignoring it, why do you think racecars have spoilers?... downforce... it pushes the car down onto the road, same thing as having weight in the back... I think you're confusing weight reduction and weight distribution, and honestly is a few kilos worth $1k plus???
Ideally for a road car, 50/50 weight distribution is the best compromise. You want a little more rearward bias for a bred race car as long on as there's not too much weight on the nose. Your comment about a lighter car being better than a balanced car is just a bit silly really, especially with every single form of motorsport spending hundreds of throusands of dollars on aerodynamics to increase down force and reduce drag. Indycars (i use them as an example because I watched a doco on the previous meth fueled turbo cars) see over 3 tonnes of downforce over the car @ 200km/hr. Weight as a number is only applicable for straight line performance under 100km/hr and should not be frowned upon with the knowledge that it can be used to good effect with the right suspension setup. Look at the GTR. It weighs almost 800kg more than the Porsche GT2, has less HP yet somehow beat it round the ring. There is nothing to support your stance that lighter and unbalanced is better than heavier and balanced.
LMFAOOOOOO i cant wait till you get it on and brake hard after a straight run. please tell me you can picture what would happen NA POWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
