[Kurt]

How would the reduction of 45 lbs in weight be worth to the performance and ET?

 

[UNGN]

I went 117.55 with stock T wheels/tires in front, swapped on some skinny front wheels/tires (about 40 lbs less) and went 118.31.

This was a combo: less rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and rotational inertia which counts triple and I didn't even get a mph.

So less than 1 mph is my answer and less than .05 of ET.

------------------

UNGN
My Timeslips Page
My G-body Homepage

 

[PRSRIZD_V6]

UNGN is right, It's an extremely dynamic change, skinny fronts won't mean jack until you're well into the low 11's. But every little bit does help, and if you can pull a 75lb stereo box out at the track I would go for it.


Having said that, I don't pull my 75lb stereo out at the track.

But I WANT to have a 11 sec car that weighs 3800lbs. heh

 

[Zap]

Depends on whether you are on the top or the bottom.

 

[savageninja]

What do you have for a stero box?

 

[forzfed]

General rule of thumb is every 100 pounds is worth a tenth. Of course depending on your ET's currently. It isn't hard to go low 12s, high 11s, but to run 10s just takes that much more horsepower. As for the skinnies most the guys I know say it is worth a tenth all day long, but there running high 11s. And of course the track, sealevel and all that has to be taken into account. Even some mustang guys are saying it is worth a tenth, of course that is at our track.

[This message has been edited by forzfed (edited November 21, 2001).]

 

[PRSRIZD_V6]

Originally posted by Zap:
Depends on whether you are on the top or the bottom.

I don't get it.

 

[PRSRIZD_V6]

Originally posted by savageninja:
What do you have for a stero box?

Boston Pro 12", PPI PC 6600, PPI PC 2800, Optima Yellow Top

 

[Steve Wood]

Originally posted by Zap:
Depends on whether you are on the top or the bottom.

Idiot! This was a serious post! Well, I tried to take it seriously, anyway!