RE: Light IS Right: PH Blog

[Valgar]

I completely agree, lightness just makes everything better, better acceleration, economy, handling, braking etc etc.

One of my favorite cars I owned was a Daihatsu Sirion Rally 2, only 110ish BHP but it weighed under 900kg and it accelerated brilliantly to 80, kinda ran out of puff after that.

Damn, I miss that car...

[JohnGoodridge]

Mark77a said:

GetCarter said:

I'll be showing this to Gordon Murray next week. Show him where he's been going wrong all these years.

I'm a huge fan of Gordon, but even he sometimes screws up ... as this week.. :-)



I'm sure its GREAT engineering and fabulous handling, AND amazing lightweight (to stay on topic)
But seriously, would even the least style aware, P-Head be seen dead in it ??? :-)

It's got a central driver's seat just like a Macca F1, weighs 550kg, and is made of 'recycled' carbon fibre. Up the boost on the engine, pipe in some S70 noise and get pretending!

[anonymous-user]

jl34 said:

Utter rubbish

A GTR is better than an old westfield because it weighs more! You should let the Royal Society know Newton was wrong after all.

[Sam All]

Porsche always quoted ps per kg. perhaps the advantage is not in their favour on GT/RS cars.

[jl34]

big_rob_sydney said:

Yes, the Ultima is a poor handling car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqmDi1m6EB0

Here it only manages to beat the Dunsfold lap record, including Michael Schumacher in a Ferrari FXX. Clearly, its crap...

Yes its massively quick on a flat track. Would get overtaken by a well driven mondeo on a bumpy A road.
The bumpsteer and tramlining has to be seen to be believed! The new evolution variant aims to correct all the geometry errors of the old one

[jl34]

fblm said:

A GTR is better than an old westfield because it weighs more! You should let the Royal Society know Newton was wrong after all.

I have not said light weight was a bad thing. You havent read my post properley. Im saying dont judge how good a car is simply by looking at a weight statistic. Unfortunately many people do

[Glosole]

Its not just weight its size too. Had lots of sporty cars over the years and the foot print on the road has increased with the weight. To me it feels harder to over take in my Lotus Evora S than it did 30 years ago in my Sunbeam Lotus. The width of modern cars makes things safer but the roads have not really changed at all to accommadate them. My tweaked early smart car is still often my weapon of choice you can be a total hooligan as even narrow roads feel like a motorway.

[unsprung]

It's like good writing: turgid is always a chore. A "lighter" approach might require more effort, but the reader will thank you.

One of my favourite topics is unsprung mass. And the related rotating mass. Astonishing what can be done nowadays. A kg saved there is worth several saved in the "sprung" part of the car.

I dream of affordable carbon fibre wheels.

ps: employing a single, transversely-mounted leaf spring... made of composite... is not a bad thing

[anonymous-user]

jl34 said:

I have not said light weight was a bad thing. You havent read my post properley. Im saying dont judge how good a car is simply by looking at a weight statistic. Unfortunately many people do

Clearly you bought a Noble understanding the advantage of power/weight. A GTR is the antithesis of your (very lovely) fleet IMO.

[jl34]

yonex said:

Clearly you bought a Noble understanding the advantage of power/weight. A GTR is the antithesis of your (very lovely) fleet IMO.

On the contrary my GT40 replica only weighs 1,000kg but its bloody awful on a bumpy road!

The noble is wonderful and the weight of course helps. However the carefully considered damping, suspension geometry, steering also play a huge part in how good it is. It amazes me to hear people rubbishing a particular car because its 100Kg heavier or whatever. That doesnt necessarily means it drives better!

[GranCab]

big_rob_sydney said:

Yes, the Ultima is a poor handling car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqmDi1m6EB0

Here it only manages to beat the Dunsfold lap record, including Michael Schumacher in a Ferrari FXX. Clearly, its crap...

Do you understand the difference between grip and handling ?

[SturdyHSV]

Tuna said:

OK Dan - Money where your mouth is - take a set of scales to your next road review and publish "Weight as tested" alongside all the manufacturers' made up figures.

It'd be good if reviewers got better at calling out the massaging of options lists and curb weights (and consequential performance impact) when reviewing this stuff.

Especially when most journos are capable of detecting the massive difference made by the 20kg Lamborrari managed to take out for their SpeciaLeggera model, you'd imagine they'd want to know how much weight ticking the options cost as the car would (apparently) get perceptibly worse with each tick.

It is an interesting topic though, more so than quibbling over MPG test results, at least we can easily verify that ourselves, access to corner weights or propping the car up level on a selection of bathroom scales is a bit inconvenient for most people

I had a punt at removing some excess weight from the Monaro, the total removed was about 50kg - 60kg, but putting the empty car on corner weights full of fluid with no driver it came out slightly heavier than Vauxhall's stated kerb weight

[anonymous-user]

jl34 said:

fblm said:

A GTR is better than an old westfield because it weighs more! You should let the Royal Society know Newton was wrong after all.

I have not said light weight was a bad thing. You havent read my post properley. Im saying dont judge how good a car is simply by looking at a weight statistic. Unfortunately many people do

My point was, calling the article 'utter rubbish' because some heavier cars are 'better' than some lighter cars is way off. Those heavier cars car 'better' despite weighing more for reasons we both understand. IMO, as a general rule the lighter the car, more often than not, the more fun it is to drive. Granted the more 'race car' you go the less fun to drive on the public road any car becomes.

[James Junior]

I agree Dan. My 370Z is great to drive at pace. It has KW V3 suspension and some breathing mods which make it quick and composed, whilst it has all the modern bells and whistles to flatter my driving style and help keep me facing the right way.

I recently took delivery of a lovely old MR2 Turbo as a weekend car and one drive down a good road was all it took to remind me how electrifying they are to drive, despite overhard Tein coilovers (which will be replaced shortly) and a seized brake caliper (now fixed).

The low kerb weight make it feel so much more responsive and you feel so much more invested in the experience.

I love my 370Z, but for me the lightness of the MR2 makes it more exciting to drive no question, though just as you commented, I wouldnt fancy my chancs much in a smash... :-/

[coppice]

Who knew Colin Chapman was so wrong ? God knows how he produced a lightweight sports car in the Elan which not only was far quicker than just about anything else around a corner but rode better too...

[kambites]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Weight on paper is no more important than any other dry statistic. Feeling of weight is what matters and whilst there's obviously a correlation, it's far from absolute. The problem with most modern sports cars is that they are heavy and they feel heavier than they are.

[jonby]

I do wish the car magazines would weigh the cars they test, with a standard approach when it comes to fuel (e.g. full tank, half tank, 20 litres, etc)

Also, to include the bits that come as standard with the car and are normally kept in the car, e.g. hazard triangle, first aid kit, glovebox manual, spare tyre/tyre kit, etc

Otherwise, as the article alludes to, there is simply no reliable standard to properly compare cars one to another

[Dan Trent]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Official quote weight for the 570S is "1,313 kg (2,895 lb) with lightweight options" (naughty but they're only doing what Ferrari does and I guess they'll always be compared) and the press pack says the optional carbon seats are -15kg so if we option them out and round it up to 1,350kg, add our 75kg driver/luggage and another 75kg for fluids (arbitrary but IIRC ballpark) it's just hitting the 1,500kg for an equivalent EU laden weight. By that measure the R8 is at least +130kg and the 911 Turbo S +175kg by official EU with driver weights. Agreed 1,500kg for a carbon tubbed car isn't quite as light as it first appears but it's still significantly less than two direct rivals.

And that's my point. Not that light cars are always the best - 4C good case in point but that's down to the set-up and calibration, not the weight. But if you're looking at three cars of comparable baseline competence - be that 570S vs R8 vs 911 Turbo S or Focus RS vs Megane vs Civic Type R - I would always be most interested in the one that had the lowest kerbweight. Final decision would rest on which I liked to drive but the point of the story is about which number on the spec should we fixate upon as our first comparison. And it's the one with 'kg' in my opinion.

I take the point also that those doing 'proper' figuring should place as much emphasis on getting a 'true' as tested weight for cars as they do acceleration stats and all the rest. It is a minefield though; not had to have a +/-75kg variance in a single model depending on options, be it a Golf R or a 911 GTS.

Cheers,

Dan

[frenchie TVR]

Hi,
I tend to agree with weight being the enemy… my fun car is a TVR Chimaera 500, which is given at 1060 kgs on the spec sheet… chucked away the old stock absorbers (which were heavy) and replaced them by Gas Gold Pros, much lighter that the original ones, which must have taken at least 20kg of the weight, so we are talking about a car that is below 1050 kgs… it has a 5L V8 with over 300 BPH, so in modern super car standards, where many weigh in at 1500 kg, the TVR would be have 430 - 450 bph equivalent…
And I guess this low weight does a few things: it make my 20 year old TVR accelerate as hard as many modern super cars and it makes it easy to throw around beds…
On the other hand though, the fact that is light makes it also a lot less comfortable that some of the modern super cars and I guess a lot more “rattlely” and noisier I guess this is inside and out (I have a decated exhaust and she’s quite laud…).

Frenchie

[Dan Trent]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

For the avoidance of doubt we absolutely agree on this - I love the M2 but I also wish they'd built something light and four-cylinder like that Series Tii concept they showed a while back. Likewise if the four-cylinder Cayman/Boxster had a significant weight reduction, smaller wheels, skinnier tyres, etc... over the 6-cyl ones the concept would be much more appealing for the likes of you and me. Market says 'it'll never happen' though, obviously.

Ta!

Dan