car weight

#81

I would not object to lowering the weight 50lbs but even with that I may have trouble finding it. I built my car based on 2750. The easy thing for me to remove would be the sound deadening in the trunk. If I do remove that then the rear is even lighter then it is now. I run a functional heater core so I can have defrost. No sunroof, no electric windows but I do have the glass as I don’t have NASCAR door bars. No passenger seat. I do have fire system and cool shirt setup. I guess I could buy lighter wheels as mine are 16.5 lbs.

I am not an overly big guy weighting 200lbs with all my gear on. My point is that it will not be as easy for everyone to remove the weight.

Michael

#82

I have been following this with little interest until I weighed my formerly portly car again this weekend. Previously, I had trunk tar, a Corbeau passenger seat and a spare wheel. I was roughly 100 lbs overweight so started taking these items out. I hit 2750 on the nose with 3/4 tank of fuel. I have all the glass in the doors, no sunroof. If I had to take much more weight out of the car I’m not sure where it would come from. 50 lbs is do-able, I think 100 would be a struggle without gutting the doors which I don’t want to do since it rides on an open trailer and is still street legal, etc. I’ll have to do some adjustment with adding weight back in as I’m under if I use a half tank during a race, but that’s a pretty simple matter of bolting the spare back into the trunk. I’m wondering what some of the rest of you have removed to get you to the point where you have to bolt ballast into the car…I’m personally not seeing it. FWIW, I weight a paltry 170 lbs too.

#83

ilateapex wrote:

Baader says it is easy. Therefore it is true.:wink:

#84

Adding weight and/or removing weight is easy on an E30 - we leave lots of stuff IN/ON the car just to make weight.

As for ballast, I got the biggest kick out of McKay’s ballast - he uses two Ford small block iron heads bolted to the floor on the passenger side… it was hilarious! Almost as funny as the GRM “Bling bling” spare ballast!

#85

Think of the song “Singing in the Rain.”

Substitute the words “pissin’ in the wind.”

A vote on car weight, funny 'eh?

RP

#86

Gosh Steve, I wish I only knew a part of what you think you do:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

For information, my current build, with everything necessary to race, sans radios and track mate…car weighed 2202# on my Longacres. YRMV Chuck

#87

I was tripping over the 302 heads about the same time the car weighed in light by about 100 pounds. Since I knew the heads were 48 pounds a piece, it just seemed like a perfect result to bolt them to a plate and put them in the car. The tech guys go nuts when I roll through, they always, seeing two heads in an inline-6 car, still say “dude you have the cars heads in the passenger side”. Yup, and I drove it here, too.

All of that said, the minimim weight on these cars, in my opinion, needs to go down at least 50 if not 100 pounds. By the time you take everything out of the car that is flammable, you wind up putting it all back in in ballast. The cars would be quicker and easier on tires and brakes if we lightened them up. Just my thought.

#88

Our car is about 2520 empty, with an empty tank of gas. It does have a passenger seat and trunk tar still in place. With my 200 lb lard ass, a little bit of fuel, and a spare tire and wheel in the trunk we meet the 2750 min. I am happy with that.

Don

#89

donstevens wrote:

[quote]Our car is about 2520 empty, with an empty tank of gas. It does have a passenger seat and trunk tar still in place. With my 200 lb lard ass, a little bit of fuel, and a spare tire and wheel in the trunk we meet the 2750 min. I am happy with that.

Don[/quote]

My car is almost exactly the same. 2527# with no driver and a couple gallons of gas and provisions for a passenger. I’m also about 200# with gear and I added a spare tire to the well also.

Instead of dropping the weight, would changing the ballast location rules make sense? Or is that a different argument altogether?

#90

donstevens wrote:

[quote]Our car is about 2520 empty, with an empty tank of gas. It does have a passenger seat and trunk tar still in place. With my 200 lb lard ass, a little bit of fuel, and a spare tire and wheel in the trunk we meet the 2750 min. I am happy with that.

Don[/quote]

lose the spare tire and tar and you’ll be at 2700

#91

I hope this doesn’t sound harsh, but if you aren’t willing to unbolt the passenger seat, scrape the mat out of the trunk, and/or replace your 20+ year old fuel system to make weight at 2650 or 2700 without starvation (yours or your engine’s), you’re probably not taking the steps on setup and car prep to put you further up the grid anyway.

Running 25 pounds heavy under those conditions isn’t going to be a game changer.

PS - I’d be interested in seeing photos of a 2,200 lb. E30 just to get an idea of what is possible. That’s impressively light.

#92

Steve D wrote:

[quote]I hope this doesn’t sound harsh, but if you aren’t willing to unbolt the passenger seat, scrape the mat out of the trunk, and/or replace your 20+ year old fuel system to make weight at 2650 or 2700 without starvation (yours or your engine’s), you’re probably not taking the steps on setup and car prep to put you further up the grid anyway.

Running 25 pounds heavy under those conditions isn’t going to be a game changer.

PS - I’d be interested in seeing photos of a 2,200 lb. E30 just to get an idea of what is possible. That’s impressively light.[/quote]

Not quite true. I don’t have a passenger seat but I left the tar in my truck after reading the forums and seeing how people were under weight so I left it in. It is where we want it, in the rear. I also added numerous extra cage reinforcing knowing I would need the weight. I have no starvation problems that I know of but I use fuel to get the weight just right. The stock fuel tank is in the ideal location and even Chuck would agree with that. My car is prepped very well and balanced very well. Removing weight from the rear is not where I want to loose it. Not much extra weight in the front that can be removed. Some of us built our cars per the rules taking care to remove or not remove what was needed. Others stripped to the hilt and then wonder why they are under weight and have to run ballast.

Michael

#93

Michael has a great point about the potential weight savings being in the rear of the car. Losing 100 lbs from these cars will likely be from items that are in the rear. This will likely cause our cars to be a bit more “loose” than current weights, no? To make weight for a 40 minute race in my car, I run 85 lbs in the passenger seat area, spare tire (35 lbs), and my cool box (15 lbs) mounted on top of my tire, with a full tank of fuel (the late model tank). At 240 lbs, the 85 lb ballast helps my cross weight, but I could lose almost 100lbs by running at half tank, removing the spare tire, and 15 lbs of ballast (gotta keep that cool shirt). That’s 85 lbs off the rear and my car is already front heavy…

On a different subject, is there a solution to fuel starvation when running a stock tank at half? I’ve never experienced fuel starvation in this car, but I always run full. At what fill level do most experience starvation problems?

#94

weight reduction almost always trumps weight distribution. if your weight was 2650 would you add 100lb to the back of the car thinking it will make you faster? i doubt it.

it’s simple folks - our cars are too heavy. not horribly so, but 2750 is heavier than it needs to be, and the informal poll shows that the vast majority of se30 racers agree. most people have to add ballast to make weight, and those that don’t probably have pseudo-ballast like tar or spare tires because removing it would make them too light. the issue is not whether the min should be changed but by how much. personally i voted for 2700 but would be happy with 2675 or even 2650, even if that means i’m “overweight” because at least i wouldn’t have to worry about it and could trim bits of mass here and there as time allows. and a little extra incentive to drop 25# of body weight isn’t a bad thing either.

#95

shaunatl wrote:

[quote]King Tut wrote:

9.3.5.3.3. Heater core and heater core box, and the related hoses, may be removed. An
electric windshield defogging system may be added.

I believe the above covers it. I checked before removing mine and received confirmation that it is legal to remove. It’s really nice to have that thing out of the way.[/quote]

Damn it. I still had last years rules saved to my computer at home. The heater core box part must have been added for 2010. I will definitely be removing it next time I pull the dash out. I also plan to use making minimum weight as incentive to drop 25# at least.

#96

jtower wrote:

[quote]weight reduction almost always trumps weight distribution. if your weight was 2650 would you add 100lb to the back of the car thinking it will make you faster? i doubt it.

it’s simple folks - our cars are too heavy. not horribly so, but 2750 is heavier than it needs to be, and the informal poll shows that the vast majority of se30 racers agree. most people have to add ballast to make weight, and those that don’t probably have pseudo-ballast like tar or spare tires because removing it would make them too light. the issue is not whether the min should be changed but by how much. personally i voted for 2700 but would be happy with 2675 or even 2650, even if that means i’m “overweight” because at least i wouldn’t have to worry about it and could trim bits of mass here and there as time allows. and a little extra incentive to drop 25# of body weight isn’t a bad thing either.[/quote]
+1
I voted for 2675, but would like to change my vote to 2650 :slight_smile:
I couldn’t expect that 100% of the people would be happy with any rule change, but it looks like 90% would be pleased to see the weight come down at least 75 lbs.

#97

Steve D wrote:

[quote]I hope this doesn’t sound harsh, but if you aren’t willing to unbolt the passenger seat, scrape the mat out of the trunk, and/or replace your 20+ year old fuel system to make weight at 2650 or 2700 without starvation (yours or your engine’s), you’re probably not taking the steps on setup and car prep to put you further up the grid anyway.

Running 25 pounds heavy under those conditions isn’t going to be a game changer.
[/quote]

It’s about cheap and easy. Cheap and easy. Cheap and easy.
Not necessarily faster.
Not necessarily better.
Cheaper.
Easier.

Everyone: After each post ask yourself…“is this guy thinking cheap and easy?”

#98

removing trunk tar - not easy but cheap
unbolting ballast - easy and not cheap (already paid for)
removing window glass - cheap and easy (its already gone)
running half tank of gas instead of full - cheap and easy

what’s the problem? :slight_smile:

#99

Not everyone has trunk tar to remove or wants to remove it from the rear of the car.
Not everyone has ballast to remove.
Not everyone has window glass to remove.
Not everyone can run a half tank without spending a bunch to completely redo their fuel tank setup.

I agree with Ranger cheap and easy. 2700 lbs sounds very cheap and easy.

#100

kishg wrote:

[quote]removing trunk tar - not easy but cheap
unbolting ballast - easy and not cheap (already paid for)
removing window glass - cheap and easy (its already gone)
running half tank of gas instead of full - cheap and easy

what’s the problem? :)[/quote]

It’s all a problem. If we set a low weight like 2650 folks will feel obligated to get down to that weight. We’re all Americans and it’ll just eat at us that our car is overweight. So what we will have done is to increase the amount of weight that must be removed. Which is to say, increase the amount of work required to build a car.

Re. ballast. I didn’t have to put ballast in until I removed some trunk tar. In retrospect that was dumb. So back when I had trunk tar, this would have “forced” me to remove it.

Re. window glass. I had to remove my window glass a couple months ago and replace it with plexiglas. I got sick and tired of fixing failed window motors. Now my car isn’t nearly as secure on the street as it was and my Traqmate, ChaseCam, bullet cameras, and video processor are suddenly more vulnerable then they were because they are only protected by a crappy piece of plexiglas. That’s $1600 worth of stuff that I’ve made more vulnerable because I got sick of crappy window motors.

Not to mention…after each event I used to be able to just hit a button and raise my windows for the trip home. Now I have to fight the damn plexiglas in. Removing window glass has downsides. What seems to be no big deal for one person can have consequences for another. Don’t force this upon people. Let folks find their own way.

Re. running a half tank of gas. I have to run a full tank or my car hiccups. If I had to run a half tank to make weight, I’d have to replace the tank. The pumps, lines and filter have alread been replaced so all that’s left is the tank. Don’t force that on folks either.

And, at 175lbs, I’m one of the lightest guys in the series. 2650 would be a lot more hassle for someone weighing 250lbs.

IMO 2700 is do-able for folks without a lot of hassle. But I think that every single one of us would have to do a fair amount of work to drop 100lbs to get to 2650lbs. And the series is not about “what we could do if we all did a fair amount of work”.