Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
M
Veteran CEG\'er
Offline
Veteran CEG\'er
M
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
I used to open my sunroof all the way (until it broke) to eliminate turbulance and move the panel weight further back. I also lay the front passenger seat all the way back. I haven't thought of folding the back seats down, though I wonder how that would affect f/r balance (since it folds forward).

I was questioning the bumper covers because I know a new hood or trunk lid isn't legal in STS, but it's cool that STS allows them.

You also might find this list useful. Some local guy made a list of legal mods per class and put them in a table.

http://www.azsolo2.com/classes/ModificationsSpreadSheet.htm


morbid 2000 Contour SVT (black)
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
M
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
M
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
Originally posted by morbid:
You also might find this list useful. Some local guy made a list of legal mods per class and put them in a table.

http://www.azsolo2.com/classes/ModificationsSpreadSheet.htm




His listing is a little out of date I hope he updates it before people start using it for this coming season.


Beaten - 2003 MazdaSpeed Protege 29K <- broken hearted Daily/Weekend Beater - 1990 miata 138K - AutoX every weekend = Adult driven on weekends
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
M
Veteran CEG\'er
Offline
Veteran CEG\'er
M
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 710
ah right. I think they're based off the 2005 rules. I thought I saw a thread on that site about them needing to be updated to the 2006 rules.


morbid 2000 Contour SVT (black)
#1503929 02/16/06 06:09 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
A
Hard-core CEG\'er
OP Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
A
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
The suspension is an obvious place to start, and it dramatically changes the way the car handles. However, as far as lap time reduction goes, weight reduction may be the best modification. I'll cover what I've done, and then list what's possible.


I began with removing the spare and jack before each event. This is free and easy, and drops about 40 lbs, even if it is off the end that's not hurting so badly. Running with less gas is another big step that's easy and free.

Some contend that weight should be left on the rear of the car, such as the jack/spare and fuel. Yes, the front end is over-loaded, but think about it this way: the front end has a given amount of work to do, based on the amout of force the car's weight puts on it in a corner. Reducing weight from the rear end will make the f/r split worse, but it will in no way make the car slower: the front end has the same amount of work to do, the rear has less, and you can accelerate and brake better with less mass! It is ALWAYS better to lose unneeded weight! The car might feel more balanced with more rear weight, but it will not be faster.

I neglected weight when dicussing suspension setups. I lost about 15lbs going to coilovers. A stock-replacement kit like the Koni or BAT kit will weight very close to the same as stock. 15 lbs isn't much, but some of it is unsprung, which helps the suspension work more effectively.

When chosing tires and wheels, weight is important! I run heavy (19lb) wheels and tires (21lb). 40 lb per corner isn't
really all that bad, but it's not that good either. Rotational mass kills your acceleration and braking by much more than non-rotational mass, so light wheels are great. Plus, since there's 4 wheels and tires, total weight loss can add up more quickly than you might think. I imagine you could get some 12lb wheels, and combined with 20 lb tires that's 32 lbs total weight loss - and it's all rotational! That's pretty serious. I'll cover wheels and tires later, after I finish some testing, and hit on some other aspects to the choice.

Next I pulled the battery out of the engine bay and put it in the trunk. Again, there are many differing viewpoints on this.

1) Get a small battery and leave it under the hood. Relocation cabling, distribution boxes, and hardware adds weight, so relocating is bad. Besides, putting it way back over the rear bumper hurts transitions, since you increase the polar moment of the car.
2) Put a heavy battery in the trunk. You need the weight back there.
3) Put a lightweight battery in the trunk. A gain of a couple lbs is worth getting 15 lbs (an average lightweight battery) moved back.

There is truth in 1 and 3. Obviously 2 isn't right, as I mentioned above. Depending on the car and application, either way might be better. I put the heavy battery in the trunk as a stepping stone to 3. I think for this platform it's not a bad idea. I added minimal weight by using 4 ga wire (it works fine, but make VERY good connections), and ripping out the heavy stock battery box. I'll take a 2-3 lb penalty to get 15 lbs moved back.

I chose this battery:

It's a Hawker Odyssey PC680, 16 amp-hours, 15 lbs. It may or may not work well in the winter - I'll see soon - but it will start just about anything well in anything but very cold weather. It was a Valentine's Day gift (yes, she's that great), and I'll put it in soon.

I also replaced the stock airbox with a K&N and custom box. This should be good for more power (engine installment coming sometime in the future to discuss this), but it also lost a lb or so. No biggie, but it's something.

So besides lightening things I needed, I began getting rid of things I didn't need. T/C is on it's way out, which is worth a few lbs right off the front. A/C is coming out too. A/C is not only heavy, but right up front, and should be a big help.

That's what I've done: what else is there?

You can put in any front seats as long as they are 15lbs. Read the rules for exact details.

Exhaust is VERY heavy. Going to a lighter setup can be very benificial, and possibly give power too. I know an S2000 driver with a 5 lb Ti exhaust!

You can also pull off exterior trim (knauberizing/debadging) and a few other things with small weight benifits.

I have a heavy car. I have a LOT of options. Looking at my (1995) sales brochure, here's what you could skip:

Power mirrors ("remote control" are standard - not power, I assumme)
Spoiler
Fog lamps
ABS
Traction Control
Keyless entry
A/C (STS has a rule always allowing A/C removal in part or in whole)
Bigger center console
Seat valance storage bins
driver's seat lumbar adjustment
Leather
light group
power windows
power locks
moonroof (this is BAD! it's a lot of weight, and it's very high.)
cruise control
rear window defroster
floor mats (you can, and should, remove these anyway when you run)
power driver's seat
Folding rear seats
casette player/premium sound

Obviously, some of these are negligible or things you might want despite a slight weight penalty. Also, if you remove any options, you have to be left with a car exactly as it could have been ordered: that is, since the SE and LX came with the folding rear seats, you can't put non-folding seats into one of them. The trouble, of course, is finding a GL V-6 so you can build this option-less car. But, the option is there...


There is one last area for weight reduction: the bodykit allowance. Bumper covers are heavy, and by building a carbon fiber or aluminum kit, you could not only get a LOT of weight off both ends, but you could possibly get some downforce on the front. I don't know of anyone that has done this to an ST* car yet, but I think it's coming. Civics might (I don't really know) have light bumper covers, but some other cars don't, and there is weight to be lost!


My car, with the weight loss I listed, should be 2800 lbs or a little under this year without gas or driver. That's a LOT of weight gone! But, guestimating what a perfectly built car could be, I cam up with 2600 lbs. The more I think about it, the more I think it's quite possible. Mid 2500's might be feasible, in fact, if you replace every legal part with a lighter variant. That is a really, really big deal.

Of course, the same amount of work on a Civic gets it down to around 1900 lbs. Oh well.


-Philip Maynard '95 Contour [71 STS | Track Whore] '97 Miata [71 ES | Boulevard Pimp] 2006 autocross results
#1503930 02/16/06 06:53 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
B
Hard-core CEG'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
B
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
Quote:

Reducing weight from the rear end will make the f/r split worse, but it will in no way make the car slower: the front end has the same amount of work to do, the rear has less, and you can accelerate and brake better with less mass! It is ALWAYS better to lose unneeded weight! The car might feel more balanced with more rear weight, but it will not be faster.



I salute you for all the work you're putting into the Auto-x forum, all the suggestions and what not; but "absolutes" like the one above are at best misleading and at worst completely wrong. This platform is quite responsive to varying levels of rear weight and it can be used very effectively depending on the course.


-- 1999 SVT #220 -- In retrospect, it was all downhill from here. RIP, CEG.
#1503931 02/16/06 07:09 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
M
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
M
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Obviously, some of these are negligible or things you might want despite a slight weight penalty. Also, if you remove any options, you have to be left with a car exactly as it could have been ordered: that is, since the SE and LX came with the folding rear seats, you can't put non-folding seats into one of them. The trouble, of course, is finding a GL V-6 so you can build this option-less car. But, the option is there...




Depending on the exact differences you might be able to use a SE/LX and "convert" to a GL using stock class rules with ST allowances.

Lets say the difference between the two is(this is a made up example)

GL
Manual Locks
Crank Windows
Non-Folding back seat
Non-Sport Suspension
GL Badging

SE/LX
Power Locks
Power Windows
Folding back seat
Sport Suspension
SE/LX Badging

IMHO to convert you would only need to change the back seat and remove the badging. As long as the power windows/locks are not lighter then the manual ones those would fall under the stock rules for comfort and convenience. Since the badging can be removed I doubt you would have any problems if you left the wrong badging on or you could just remove it and save the 4oz. The suspension falls under the ST rules of letting you change it.

If I knew the exact differences I could give you a better idea of where I stand for sure.


Beaten - 2003 MazdaSpeed Protege 29K <- broken hearted Daily/Weekend Beater - 1990 miata 138K - AutoX every weekend = Adult driven on weekends
#1503932 02/16/06 07:20 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
A
Hard-core CEG\'er
OP Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
A
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Changes in rear weight can certainly change how the car handles, which may mean the driver is able to turn in a faster time. Also, significant changes in weight distribution must be attended by suspension tuning to keep the car balanced. I have certainly been able to go faster some times because of the extra weight of the battery getting the car to rotate when I made a mistake and had to try to rotate harder than my line would have allowed. But, in hard and fast terms, lighter is always faster.


But not really. To paraphrase Carrol Smith, the car exists only as a tool for the racing driver. I did neglect that when writing, and I'm glad you brought it up. The car may be theroetically faster with less weight in the rear, but if the car is undriveable - think of the extreme case of almost zero weight on the rear axle, where it would be impossible to tune the car - it's worthless.

I'll add a disclaimer, which is very important:

Everything I write here is my opinion, and what works for me. There are some technical absolutes, but in autocross, where drivers have incredibly different skill levels, driving techniques, and previous experience, there is only one way to figure out what is the fastest: get in and drive, and let the stopwatch decide. You have to be careful to realize what is a problem in your driving style instead of the car, and optimize the combination of human and machine, but humans are so different that there can be no absolutes in things that greatly affect transient handling, where driver input plays such a huge role.

That said, I'd like to think that if you follow my advice, which is gained from large amounts of time reading, designing, building, and testing, you'll do well. But there are disagreements on major issues among the top eschelon of autocross drivers, so what I do may not always be the best. Listen to others - BigMoneyRacing and DemonSVT like a more even weight distribution, for instance - and make your own decisions, based on our data and thoughts, and your tests.


-Philip Maynard '95 Contour [71 STS | Track Whore] '97 Miata [71 ES | Boulevard Pimp] 2006 autocross results
#1503933 02/16/06 07:22 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 751
W
Veteran CEG\'er
Offline
Veteran CEG\'er
W
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 751
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
Quote:

Reducing weight from the rear end will make the f/r split worse, but it will in no way make the car slower: the front end has the same amount of work to do, the rear has less, and you can accelerate and brake better with less mass! It is ALWAYS better to lose unneeded weight! The car might feel more balanced with more rear weight, but it will not be faster.



I salute you for all the work you're putting into the Auto-x forum, all the suggestions and what not; but "absolutes" like the one above are at best misleading and at worst completely wrong. This platform is quite responsive to varying levels of rear weight and it can be used very effectively depending on the course.




I tend to side with Colin Chapman. Always add lightness when you can. More mass means that the suspension will take more time to set and hurt you in transitions. Always.


Whirling dervish of FFOG.
#1503934 02/16/06 08:21 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
B
Hard-core CEG'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG'er
B
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,149
Then maybe you can get Mr. Chapman's company to get the curb weight on a Contour down to Elise levels!

Meanwhile back in the real world, racing with cars whose list of shortcomings for auto-x is as long as your arm, utilizing various weight distributions remains an effective (not to mention incredibly cost effective) way to optimize time around many courses. Have you guys honestly never witnessed someone leave in the middle of an auto-x to get more fuel to change the weight distribution?


-- 1999 SVT #220 -- In retrospect, it was all downhill from here. RIP, CEG.
#1503935 02/16/06 08:40 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
M
Hard-core CEG\'er
Offline
Hard-core CEG\'er
M
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,100
Originally posted by bigMoneyRacing:
Have you guys honestly never witnessed someone leave in the middle of an auto-x to get more fuel to change the weight distribution?




I never have. I have seen people refilling from their gas can because they run on as little gas as they can but I have not seen people run out to get more gas to change the weight distribution.


Beaten - 2003 MazdaSpeed Protege 29K <- broken hearted Daily/Weekend Beater - 1990 miata 138K - AutoX every weekend = Adult driven on weekends
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Auto-X Fil 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5