JeffC Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Ooooh everyone....Look....A p*****g contest no mention of v8"s on here Beeland haddaway and find your own thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott beeland Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Too much torque for ya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perksy Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Too much torque for ya Enough Torque to Stretch the Sqares on a Tartan Rug and twist the Hinges on the Lid of the Picnic Hamper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Ashcroft Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 QUOTE the world is round , any one care to argue its actually flat No But did you know the power to keep it spinning is a V8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu999 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 the world is round , any one care to argue its actually flat No But did you know the power to keep it spinning is a V8 So thats where all of the fossil fuels are going then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffC Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Enough Torque to Stretch the Sqares on a Tartan Rug and twist the Hinges on the Lid of the Picnic Hamper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisG Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Too much torque for ya Enough Torque to Stretch the Sqares on a Tartan Rug and twist the Hinges on the Lid of the Picnic Hamper ROFL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu999 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 And now, to stir it up some more - what the f**k had torque got to do with it? If torque was the answer, why dont the 'cooking' Westfields et al have diesel engines? Because the measurement of torque on it's own is virtually irrelevant. You can give a Briggs and Stratton lawnmower engine stupendous torque if you gear it low enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conibear Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Gosh, as we nearly agree we could be married, no maybe not. No idea what a 200bhp vx torque is but i'd surprised if were not far off 170lb/ft though. Weights: All I know is what my car weighs, but I also know what a VX in very similar guise weighs and there is not much in it. Just for conversation, I reckon a 250bhp CEC with proper road tyres will get to 60 in under 3 secs and 100 in 8 sec's, don't know how quick it can stop though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rm163603 Posted September 13, 2007 Share Posted September 13, 2007 Yes The car was the original Busa demo and appeared in magazines and on Westfield publicity literature. At one time it even had blue bodywork. (On Image wheels ad)I will see if I can dig out copies for you I'm pretty sure I have the original brochure with the blue busa with image wheels. Jeff let me know if you want me to hunt for it and email you a scanned copy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazzer Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 There's no relation between those figures and weight of car, they are absolute figures regardless of whether the car weight 5kgs or 5 tons. Therefore if the car with 1600lbft at the wheels weighed the same as the one with 1500lbft it would accelerate more quickly. It doesnt weigh the same though, something you cannot deny! Chris, you have misread my post. Above is exactly what I imply, the CEC has more torque at the wheels As you state Regarding the weight comment which you have misread, I think weight of any vehicle should be regarded as tongue in cheek. Because you may think a 1.3L Busa weighs 485kg and I may think it weigh 510kg do you think we can all boast at how much my car weighs or doesn't weigh that is my point, but what does it actually weigh, this is important in the torque sum is it not I may have drifted some from the 210bhp is equivalent to a standard Busa, but never stated it's substantial or a clear advantage Mine ACTUALY wieghed 480Kg with half a talk for fuel on a set of corner weighting scales. Agreed it does not weigh the 440Kg that Westfield used to claim. but its at least 10% lighter than most light weight CEC's Bazzer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffC Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 how do you get yours as low as 480kg, my last car was around 505kg before cage and my current busa is 512kg with caged cage/ half fuel and Im b*******ed if I can see what I can remove to loose 40kg yeh would like any info on my car in the early days when I removed the sides to flare the tub I noticed there was an extra set of holes so I guessed it must have been retubbed at some point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazzer Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 Its only 25Kg 505-480 It didn't have a cage at the time. ACB10's and Dymags save a fair bit over most wheel tyre combinations. Can't remember if I had anti roll bars at the time. It had the floppy light weight bodywork. Ali brakes etc and all the other light weight bits WF did. I also think it was when I used to run with one seat. I injured a mate of mine in my TVR when I crashed at a track day about 8 years ago. So I ran with no passenger seat for a couple of years. That way I never had to feel bad turning people down for passenger rides. In fairness I think it was 482Kg's : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Yupright Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 My blade was as low as 410kgs when it was first built with all fluids except fuel. It was 430 with a full tank. This was with 6inch wide R500 wheels (3kgs each) and 6inch wide ACB10s. No cage, no widetrack, no ARBs and no leccy reverse. Did have the heavy M16 calipers though. Over the years I added: 8kgs on 4 wheels (switching to the caterham 8 spokes) 8kgs on 4 tyres (switching to A048s) 5kgs on the leccy reverse. 10kgs or so on the cage widetrack (1kg??) arbs (3kgs) got some ali 4 pots (saved 3kgs) It was about 440 with all fluids but fuel when I sold it. So say 460 with fuel. Kinda ties in with Bazzers as the busa lump + drysump guff is heavier than the blade. Shame it couldnt have stayed at 410kgs though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffC Posted September 14, 2007 Share Posted September 14, 2007 480-512 = 32kg mine has image wheels which are light, fair bit of carbon, alli brakes ,lightweight seats etc this car has sierra diff rather than freelander. not sure how much heavier the caged cage is over the rac bar but it didnt seem that bad when I fitted it my car with me in it is 600kg sooooooo how can I shed a lump of weight without me hitting the slimfasts then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.