woodman Posted July 5, 2004 Posted July 5, 2004 133hp /508kg =262bhp per ton 133hp /585kg=227bhp per ton narrow body sei, x/flow,road going sprint car. now approx 490kg with removal of screen ,pillars,wipers and fitting of acb 10 tyres for change to class e in wscc spints. stu hill Quote
Matt Seabrook Posted July 5, 2004 Posted July 5, 2004 There seems to be a lot about 500kg ish me thinks some more work is needed on the race car Quote
davidgh Posted July 5, 2004 Posted July 5, 2004 For those who think Strikers are light -- here's the awful truth. At exactly 550kg the orange beast on the left is marginally the lightest car-engined, road-going (screen/wipers, etc.) car that Raw have put on the corner weights. With ca. 160ps of standard 1600 engine that works out at only around 290 ps/tonne - and that's before you handicap it with a svelte 85Kg of ballast behind the wheel. Still fun though Quote
jdinhants Posted July 5, 2004 Posted July 5, 2004 Bog standard CVH Without driver ! 100bhp / 602 kgs = 166 bhp per ton With driver, don't even bother Still couldn't keep it on the black stuff Surprised I managed to break 50 seconds J D Quote
Bazzer Posted July 6, 2004 Posted July 6, 2004 My Megabusa was :- 480Kgs on Blackbird Motorsports scales and 185BHP at the crank on our local Rolling road (so anywhere between 20BHP and 300BHP in reality) On its own 185/0.48 = 375BHP/ton With pie man on board 185/0.58 = 319BHP/ton Bazzer Quote
Mark Stanton Posted July 6, 2004 Posted July 6, 2004 Still couldn't keep it on the black stuff C'mon John your CVH was flyin' at Curborough Quote
felters Posted July 6, 2004 Posted July 6, 2004 John - how was Gurston? I've got my session in a few weeks... Cheers Mike Quote
woodman Posted July 6, 2004 Posted July 6, 2004 There seems to be a lot about 500kg ish me thinks some more work is needed on the race car Matt it maybe that some of the cars [inc mine] are narrow body which are significantly lighter to start with Quote
barney Posted July 7, 2004 Posted July 7, 2004 Does anyone have the data to the difference in weight between normal and lightweight bodywork for a narrow bodied car.. just *ahem* interested, well winter is coming Rubble Quote
Matt Seabrook Posted July 7, 2004 Posted July 7, 2004 There seems to be a lot about 500kg ish me thinks some more work is needed on the race car Matt it maybe that some of the cars [inc mine] are narrow body which are significantly lighter to start with Thanks Woodman yep as Blatman said my sprint car is an SE and not and SEW its about 540kg so a little way to go to get it down to 500kg but all I have really done is remove anything that was not required carpets boot box etc. The rest is down to spending money on lightweight stuff. Still when I think I am good enough to be able to tell the difference between a 540kg car and a 500kg car then it might be time to get my hand in my pocket. The car is not helped by having a lump of a Vx stuck in it. A mate has an almost identical spec Zetec car and that is more than 20kg lighter than my Vx car so I already have a penalty there. Quote
Ian Podmore Posted July 7, 2004 Posted July 7, 2004 The car is not helped by having a lump of a Vx stuck in it. Does anyone have the data to the difference in weight between normal and lightweight bodywork for a narrow bodied car.. It'll float away soon if your not careful Quote
fordy Posted July 7, 2004 Posted July 7, 2004 Wasnt measured on ACWs scales, but has been weighed before. 120 bhp /640kg = 187.5 bhp/tonne - without me 120 / 705 = 170 bhp/tonne - with me. Road going xflow. Just as well im a lightweight It would be interesting to have these figures next to our names on the timing sheet at events - makes it easier to work out if your doing well or not. cheers Chris Quote
Richard M Green Posted July 7, 2004 Posted July 7, 2004 2001 SEW 1600 K with carpets, interior panels, sports seats etc: 534kg unladen With male driver installed: 620kg. With No.2 driver installed: CLASSIFIED 185bhp gives: 346 bhp/tonne empty or 298 with me. Very happy with front:rear distribution ratio of 47%:53% and cross weight percentage of 49.2% Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.