RE: Light IS Right: PH Blog
Discussion
frenchie TVR said:
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…
Um, I'd say TVR is an example that proves lightweight cars are *not* inherently better handling. The TVR forums on this site are riddled with thread after thread about how to make them handle properly!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…
Olivera said:
frenchie TVR said:
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…
Um, I'd say TVR is an example that proves lightweight cars are *not* inherently better handling. The TVR forums on this site are riddled with thread after thread about how to make them handle properly!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…
The TVR case is more about consistency between cars and poor alignment tolerances : one new TVR could be spot on and the very "same" car made the day after could be seriously iffy.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Couldn't agree more. For a manufacturer, adding lightness costs more than adding power. When charging more for a special version of a car, 99% of customers will expect it to have more power and thus faster than the standard one, even if reducing weight but leaving the engine alone would achieve the same end.Take the 718 Boxter and Boxter S for example. What if Porsche took the standard car, and in order to turn it into the Boxter S, they just made it much lighter?. How much lighter would it need to be to achieve the required performance advantage? How much more would it cost to achieve?. It would be interesting to know.
[quote=James Junior]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.
The MR2 Turbo is hard to replace the dynamics of it for the money are unbeatable mine languishes a bit unloved in the corner of the garden would have another in a shot hopefully without the rust in A pillers though.On yellow Billes and Eibac spings and modern rubber and few tunning bits it was a proper weapon on any type of road. On test it out perfomed tarmac spec Evo rally cars . Its still heavy though had VW Mk 1 Scirroco TS that was 750 kg and Lotus Sunbeam was like 860kg .
Now days thats stripped out track day special numbers.
The low kerb weight make it feel so much more responsive and you feel so much more invested in the experience.
The MR2 Turbo is hard to replace the dynamics of it for the money are unbeatable mine languishes a bit unloved in the corner of the garden would have another in a shot hopefully without the rust in A pillers though.On yellow Billes and Eibac spings and modern rubber and few tunning bits it was a proper weapon on any type of road. On test it out perfomed tarmac spec Evo rally cars . Its still heavy though had VW Mk 1 Scirroco TS that was 750 kg and Lotus Sunbeam was like 860kg .
Now days thats stripped out track day special numbers.
A GTR defies physics to some extent... until you try to throw one around a tight hairpin. You can feel every kg then.
A lighter car with the correct suspension/dampening will always handle and ride better than a heavier one. Of course there are plenty of lighter cars with suspect geometry/setups (certain TVRs, Ultima apparently) but that hardly means heavy is best!
A lighter car with the correct suspension/dampening will always handle and ride better than a heavier one. Of course there are plenty of lighter cars with suspect geometry/setups (certain TVRs, Ultima apparently) but that hardly means heavy is best!
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It must depend massively on the car and what degree of usability and reliability you're intending to maintain. Cutting 20% off the weight of the average modern road car is pretty easy; cutting 20% without significantly impacting NVH and/or practicality is generally either very difficult or very expensive. Similarly, adding 20% more power to a modern high-performance turbocharged engine is typically very easy; adding 20% more power without impacting reliability or emissions tends to be expensive.
I'm sure making a lightweight Cayman would have been cheaper, bhp/tonne for bhp/tonne, than a more powerful one and would probably have resulted in a better drivers' car. It's value in the market would have been considerably lower though, because it would have ended up less... Germanic feeling.
Edited by kambites on Friday 29th April 18:06
With so much talk about weight and Colin Chapman "adding lightness", let's see if we can spot the car which is potentially hampered by its weight,
- Lotus Esprit (1996) - 1,350 kg, mid-engined, 350 bhp
- Porsche Cayman S (2016) - 1,350 kg, mid-engined, 350 bhp
- Lotus Evora S (2016) - 1,350 kg, mid-engined, 350 bhp
- McLaren 570S (2016) - 1,450 kg, mid-engined, 562 bhp
Can we stop using Caymans and Boxsters in the context of the word 'light'. Christ, my old DC2 was something like 1100kgs and that wasn't exactly a tiny little car. Caterham, Atom, BAC, lightweight cars, with awesome controls and proper feel rather than limp power assisted everything. Because of their bulk these bloated sportsters needing daft power to feel anything approaching tepid necessitates wide, stiff tyres, increasing capacities then further plumped up with electric options. It's the very opposite of what I'd consider a focused toy. But they sell. It's what people want. If there were any justice Lotus would mop up the 'useable drivers car' market, but against the snobbery and general malaise about driving they will always struggle. Lightness has always been the way to make things interesting and when engineered with the suspension to match it's a joy.
yonex said:
Can we stop using Caymans and Boxsters in the context of the word 'light'.
I think we were using Caymans and Boxster in the context of "not light but probably capable of being made light". 
I think the Cayman and Boxster are pretty much entirely average weight as modern two-seater sports cars go. The 911 is pretty light for a big 2+2.
Edited by kambites on Friday 29th April 18:31
suffolk009 said:
Well journos have long stopped trusting manufacturers claims on 0-60 times. So why they believe, and expect us to believe, the weight claims (and bhp) is quite beyond me.
How difficult would it be to take a set of scale to accurately weight the car?
Getting a car to an independent dyno might be harder.
Not difficult at all - one UK mag has been doing it for decades How difficult would it be to take a set of scale to accurately weight the car?
Getting a car to an independent dyno might be harder.
kambites said:
It must depend massively on the car and what degree of usability and reliability you're intending to maintain. Cutting 20% off the weight of the average modern road car is pretty easy; cutting 20% without significantly impacting NVH and/or practicality is generally either very difficult or very expensive.
Similarly, adding 20% more power to a modern high-performance turbocharged engine is typically very easy; adding 20% more power without impacting reliability or emissions tends to be expensive.
I'm sure making a lightweight Cayman would have been cheaper, bhp/tonne for bhp/tonne, than a more powerful one and would probably have resulted in a better drivers' car. It's value in the market would have been considerably lower though, because it would have ended up less... Germanic feeling.
Apologies for the pedantry, but FWIW you'd only have to cut 16.6% weight to get the same bhp/ton increase as a 20% engine boost.Similarly, adding 20% more power to a modern high-performance turbocharged engine is typically very easy; adding 20% more power without impacting reliability or emissions tends to be expensive.
I'm sure making a lightweight Cayman would have been cheaper, bhp/tonne for bhp/tonne, than a more powerful one and would probably have resulted in a better drivers' car. It's value in the market would have been considerably lower though, because it would have ended up less... Germanic feeling.
Edited by kambites on Friday 29th April 18:06
kambites said:
I think we were using Caymans and Boxster in the context of "not light but probably capable of being made light".
I think the Cayman and Boxster are pretty much entirely average weight as modern two-seater sports cars go. The 911 is pretty light for a big 2+2.
What is the GT4, 1450kgs, isn't that similar to an NSX/355? And the above is my point, the odd 100kg might transform the car but the modern 'sports car' is just a bit of a bloater.I think the Cayman and Boxster are pretty much entirely average weight as modern two-seater sports cars go. The 911 is pretty light for a big 2+2.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 29th April 18:31
yonex said:
What is the GT4, 1450kgs, isn't that similar to an NSX/355? And the above is my point, the odd 100kg might transform the car but the modern 'sports car' is just a bit of a bloater.
The GT4 is about 1380kg wet. I think 1250 would have been easy enough if they'd spent the money on weight reduction rather than increasing power but then no-one would have bought it. Modern sports cars are heavy and powerful because the huge majority of sports car buyers want powerful cars and couldn't care less about weight. If I had to pick sporty cars which stood out as "light" compared to the competition today, I think I'd pick the 911 and the MX5 but both are pretty heavy my historical standards because both focus a fair bit on luxury by historical standards.
Edited by kambites on Friday 29th April 18:58
So in summary which would you rather drive, sorry pilot?
or
It's all about the corners unless you are drag racing.
Drag racing brings up light weight again. Top Fuel weigh about 1000kg. So even here they are light.
In a straight line or through the twisties the world of motorsport wants lightness. They don't do it for s
ts and giggles.
If Nissan made the next update of the GT-R a lot smaller and 3/4 the weight and only 3/4 the power, people would love it. That would give you 400bhp in 1300kg. Which sounds fantastic.
But they cannot do it because the car is so huge.
or
It's all about the corners unless you are drag racing.
Drag racing brings up light weight again. Top Fuel weigh about 1000kg. So even here they are light.
In a straight line or through the twisties the world of motorsport wants lightness. They don't do it for s
ts and giggles.If Nissan made the next update of the GT-R a lot smaller and 3/4 the weight and only 3/4 the power, people would love it. That would give you 400bhp in 1300kg. Which sounds fantastic.
But they cannot do it because the car is so huge.
Gandahar said:
So in summary which would you rather drive, sorry pilot?
or
It's all about the corners unless you are drag racing.
Drag racing brings up light weight again. Top Fuel weigh about 1000kg. So even here they are light.
In a straight line or through the twisties the world of motorsport wants lightness. They don't do it for sts and giggles.
If Nissan made the next update of the GT-R a lot smaller and 3/4 the weight and only 3/4 the power, people would love it. That would give you 400bhp in 1300kg. Which sounds fantastic.
But they cannot do it because the car is so huge.
The tanker must be the best as it has more power. or
It's all about the corners unless you are drag racing.
Drag racing brings up light weight again. Top Fuel weigh about 1000kg. So even here they are light.
In a straight line or through the twisties the world of motorsport wants lightness. They don't do it for s
ts and giggles.If Nissan made the next update of the GT-R a lot smaller and 3/4 the weight and only 3/4 the power, people would love it. That would give you 400bhp in 1300kg. Which sounds fantastic.
But they cannot do it because the car is so huge.
kambites said:
The GT4 is about 1380kg wet. I think 1250 would have been easy enough if they'd spent the money on weight reduction rather than increasing power but then no-one would have bought it.
Modern sports cars are heavy and powerful because the huge majority of sports car buyers want powerful cars and couldn't care less about weight. If I had to pick sporty cars which stood out as "light" compared to the competition today, I think I'd pick the 911 and the MX5 but both are pretty heavy my historical standards because both focus a fair bit on luxury by historical standards.
I'd consider 1200kgs a decent level, still hardly light but there you go. Once you start getting the mass down then you could shave the unsprung weight off of the wheels, discs, you maybe wouldn't need such huge calipers etc. We're talking about a two seater sports car that's barely any lighter than something designed in 1990! (NSX) With the advances in metals, composites and manufacturing processes it doesn't seem like a huge achievement. There would be a market, there always is, just a question of numbers. Modern sports cars are heavy and powerful because the huge majority of sports car buyers want powerful cars and couldn't care less about weight. If I had to pick sporty cars which stood out as "light" compared to the competition today, I think I'd pick the 911 and the MX5 but both are pretty heavy my historical standards because both focus a fair bit on luxury by historical standards.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 29th April 18:58
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff