SCCAForums.com

SCCA Racing Forums, Discussions and Blogs

Welcome to SCCAForums.com Sign in | Join | Latest Posts | My Posts | Help
in Search

Weight vs. power

Last post 05-05-2008, 9:35 AM by Bobzilla. 40 replies.
Page 1 of 3 (41 items)   1 2 3 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  03-09-2008, 5:35 AM 289100

    Weight vs. power

    Say you have two cars, they have an extremely similar suspension setup and are on the same tires, one has 70whp and weighs 2000 pounds, one has 120whp and weighs 2300 pounds. They are both FWD open diff and the lighter car also has a 2 inch shorter wheel base.

     

    How much of a difference will there be in the performance? 

  •  03-09-2008, 8:49 AM 289104 in reply to 289100

    Re: Weight vs. power

    323 vs. EGT?Cool
    Erik B.
    Wisconsin Autocrossers, Inc
    www.waiautox.org ___/\___/\___/\___/\___/\___
    2007 Mazda6
    2000 "Fozda" ZX2 S/R--STS Anti-Civic
  •  03-09-2008, 10:27 AM 289111 in reply to 289100

    Re: Weight vs. power

    When you say same tires... same compound, or same size?

     I look at it this way... the Civics that dominate STS are dog slow in a straight line.  But they only weigh 2000lbs.
     


    -Travis Finlay
    1997 Saturn SC2
    2002 Subaru 2.5RS
    1995 YZF 600R
  •  03-09-2008, 1:18 PM 289127 in reply to 289100

    • jzr is online. Last active: 09/08/2008, 12:57 AM jzr
    • Top 75 Contributor
    • Joined on 10-20-2002
    • San Diego, CA
    • Posts 798
    • Points 11,610

    Re: Weight vs. power

    atechnica:

    Say you have two cars, they have an extremely similar suspension setup and are on the same tires, one has 70whp and weighs 2000 pounds, one has 120whp and weighs 2300 pounds. They are both FWD open diff and the lighter car also has a 2 inch shorter wheel base.

     

    How much of a difference will there be in the performance? 

    They both get slaughtered by the cars on those same tires, that have even better suspensions, make 120whp, and only weigh 2000 pounds.

     STS Civics are not that slow in a straight line, at least in comparison to other STS cars.


    --Jason Rhoades
  •  03-12-2008, 2:35 AM 289655 in reply to 289127

    Re: Weight vs. power

    i would say go for the lightest car you can...as long as they have close power/weight ratios.  in the example you provided, though...you have a power to weight ratio of  19.16 on the 120hp car and 28.57 on the 70hp car.  if the ratios were a bit closer...say a 100hp weighing 2000 lbs, i would go for it.  lower power to weight is good for acceleration...but you can also throw a lighter car around a corner faster..and conserve momentum easier because you won't be into the brakes as hard...or early.
  •  03-12-2008, 11:02 AM 289728 in reply to 289655

    Re: Weight vs. power

    Considering the amount of time spent turning/transitioning versus the amount of time spent at full throttle in autox, most would agree that given equal tires, weight is more important.

    VW R32
    32 STX
  •  03-12-2008, 11:34 AM 289744 in reply to 289728

    Re: Weight vs. power

    Weight is definitely more important, to a point. You have to have some power though. And a good suspension design. It's a mix for sure. If weight completely dominated the other factors, you'd see 1600 or 1700 lb cars on top of STS, not 2000 lb cars.

    Brian Davis, 89 Civic Si, 158 STS
  •  03-12-2008, 8:12 PM 289832 in reply to 289744

    Re: Weight vs. power

    turbohappy:
    Weight is definitely more important, to a point. You have to have some power though. And a good suspension design. It's a mix for sure. If weight completely dominated the other factors, you'd see 1600 or 1700 lb cars on top of STS, not 2000 lb cars.

     

    We had a nearly stock old old old style civic with 50hp play in STS here and it did SURPRISINGLY well. It kinda makes me wonder.

     

    I can't really think of anything that's better than the 89 civic, but I got a 323 for $200 so I was considering trying it once or twice just to see what would happen.
     

  •  03-12-2008, 8:53 PM 289844 in reply to 289744

    Re: Weight vs. power

    turbohappy:
    Weight is definitely more important, to a point. You have to have some power though. And a good suspension design. It's a mix for sure. If weight completely dominated the other factors, you'd see 1600 or 1700 lb cars on top of STS, not 2000 lb cars.

    Go for the lighter one. Just add a little more power to it and the good suspension design turbohappy suggested. :)

     

     

     

    _____________________________
    Perfect trucks, perfect truck parts.

  •  03-25-2008, 5:50 PM 291953 in reply to 289844

    Re: Weight vs. power

     

    It all depends.

    Land speed racing - its all about power and drag

    Drag racing - its all power to weight

    Autocross - is more about weight, because lightweight makes you accelerate faster in ALL directions (better braking, cornering, and straight line acceleration)

    Road racing - is a mix between Autocross and drag racing

     

    And of course, a really light car on skinny tires will often be beat by a heavier car with wide tires.  So think tire to weight too.
     


    Bruce Funderburg
    '02 CMC 7 - DM
    '04 Subaru WRX STi - STU

    It will be of little avail ... if the laws [or rules] be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood...
    Alexander Hamilton
  •  03-26-2008, 12:39 AM 292018 in reply to 289111

    Re: Weight vs. power

    ProDarwin:
    I look at it this way... the Civics that dominate STS are dog slow in a straight line.  But they only weigh 2000lbs.

     

     

    I have to agree with Jason here, a fully prepped STS civic is pretty darn fast in a straight line. I was amazed when I first drove one with a healthy motor. Surprise 


    00' 328Ci
    01' Tahoe LT
    98' Camaro Z28 - dead
    95' 325is - STX 182

  •  03-26-2008, 11:36 AM 292063 in reply to 291953

    Re: Weight vs. power

    Grintch:

    Drag racing - its all power to weight

    Autocross - is more about weight, because lightweight makes you accelerate faster in ALL directions (better braking, cornering, and straight line acceleration)

    Road racing - is a mix between Autocross and drag racing

    Basic physics suggests otherwise, and has been proven in many different classes in drag racing, i.e. Bill Jenkins small block Vega vs. Sox & Martin Hemi Cuda.  Given equal power to weight ratios, the lighter car will be quicker due to the forces of inertia. "An object at rest tends to stay at rest." It is easier to get the lighter vehicle moving. Henceforth, it it also easier to get it to slow down or change direction. "An object in motion tends to stay in motion."

    200 hp @ 2000 lbs. vs. 400 hp @ 4000 lbs. ... my money is on the lighter car. Wink

    Jim 

  •  03-26-2008, 1:31 PM 292091 in reply to 292063

    Re: Weight vs. power

     

    Basic physics is F=m*a (force = mass x acceleration) or a = F / m.  Where HP is related to the force availible.

     The Vega & Cuda probably both mounted the same size rear tires, so the Vega had the superior tire to weight ratio.

     

    So if you have the choice of sending $1000 to reduce the weight by 10% or increase the power by 10%,

    for top speed increase power

    for drag racing it is close to a wash (with fixed tire sizes, reducing weight will be slightly better)

    for autocross or road racing reduce the weight

     

    Of course in real life the choice is never that easy, too many other factors (like what the rules allow), and the comparative cost and results usually aren't known ahead of time.
     


    Bruce Funderburg
    '02 CMC 7 - DM
    '04 Subaru WRX STi - STU

    It will be of little avail ... if the laws [or rules] be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood...
    Alexander Hamilton
  •  03-26-2008, 2:00 PM 292101 in reply to 292018

    Re: Weight vs. power

    Mooobunnny:
    ProDarwin:
    I look at it this way... the Civics that dominate STS are dog slow in a straight line.  But they only weigh 2000lbs.

     

     

    I have to agree with Jason here, a fully prepped STS civic is pretty darn fast in a straight line. I was amazed when I first drove one with a healthy motor. Surprise 

    They should at least be mid 15 second 1/4 mile cars if fully built for STS.  I wouldn't call that extremely fast, but that certainly isn't dog slow, either.


    Todd
    Too many ST cars

    "Restricted Area Racing"
  •  03-26-2008, 4:37 PM 292131 in reply to 292101

    Re: Weight vs. power

    tkm:
    Mooobunnny:
    ProDarwin:
    I look at it this way... the Civics that dominate STS are dog slow in a straight line.  But they only weigh 2000lbs.

     

     

    I have to agree with Jason here, a fully prepped STS civic is pretty darn fast in a straight line. I was amazed when I first drove one with a healthy motor. Surprise 

    They should at least be mid 15 second 1/4 mile cars if fully built for STS.  I wouldn't call that extremely fast, but that certainly isn't dog slow, either.

     

    I wouldn't be surprised if they were faster than mid 15's, my STS car (the 120+?whp 2300lb one) runs even with low 15 second cars from a roll, but then it does have more torque than a civic.

  •  03-26-2008, 4:52 PM 292133 in reply to 292131

    Re: Weight vs. power

    FWIW: We've run 14.60's with our STS Neon ACR.

    Jim

  •  03-26-2008, 5:31 PM 292139 in reply to 292133

    Re: Weight vs. power

    SeniorPBA2B:

    FWIW: We've run 14.60's with our STS Neon ACR.

    Jim

    That's impressive, what was your power/weight and tires? 

     

    EDIT: actually this is interesting enough to make a thread out of :cool: 

  •  03-26-2008, 5:56 PM 292144 in reply to 292139

    Re: Weight vs. power

    The motor was 128 hp at the wheels on last year's DNO Dyno Day. With 1/4 tank of gas, it weighed 2,347 lbs. at the Toledo Pro Solo, plus my 145 lb. driver. We last ran the car on the strip in June or July of '06, so I honestly don't remember if the 14.60's were on Victoracers or Azenis.

    Jim

  •  03-26-2008, 9:13 PM 292176 in reply to 289100

    Re: Weight vs. power

    ya..
    I foolishly thought my old 97 GTI VR6 would be the fastest STS car in a straight line with 150hp and 160lb-ft to the wheels (at mile high elevation), though it was 2700lbs and not fully prepped or lightened at that.

    At the 2006 Denver ProSolo I went up against many well-prepped Civic Si's and I had nothing on them. After the first corner it was all downhill of course.. especially as I was using the same 205/50-15 Azenis 615's that they were. Good times.
    http://naufana.com/autox/20060722diaprosolo (videos)


    -Kelly
    Rocky Mountain Region - 94 Integra DB8 STS/ codriver B18C'ed JRSC'ed EG Civic hatch SM.
    Apex RacingGroup.com
  •  04-16-2008, 11:27 PM 295708 in reply to 292176

    Re: Weight vs. power

    gtitronic:

    ya..
    I foolishly thought my old 97 GTI VR6 would be the fastest STS car in a straight line with 150hp and 160lb-ft to the wheels (at mile high elevation), though it was 2700lbs and not fully prepped or lightened at that.

    At the 2006 Denver ProSolo I went up against many well-prepped Civic Si's and I had nothing on them. After the first corner it was all downhill of course.. especially as I was using the same 205/50-15 Azenis 615's that they were. Good times.
    http://naufana.com/autox/20060722diaprosolo (videos)

    I foolishly thought the same thing this year.  My tC pushes about 163hp at the wheels and weighs about 2800lbs.  Needless to say, I'm finding I need to do a lot of suspension work so I can handle all the weight I'm throwing around the track.  Weight definitely has the advantage over the power, unless you're running on a course with straights long enough to where you can utilize all that power.


    #12 STS 2007 Scion tC
    #24 ITS/DSP 1991 Nissan 240SX
Page 1 of 3 (41 items)   1 2 3 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML