Anyone actually weighed the mass of a Griffith????
Anyone actually weighed the mass of a Griffith????
Author
Discussion

ScoobySnack

Original Poster:

282 posts

300 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
I know what the factory says

But has anyone been and weighed theirs?


Cheers

J

Griffithy

929 posts

293 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Hi!

We had to weight the Griff500 for the registration and it had 1.080kg, no person in it, but no idea about fuellevel.

tvr4ever

643 posts

277 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Had the Griffith (4.3) weight, it's 1015 kg. Mind you without the (limp home) spare wheel. Nearly empty fueltank, oil level was to the max though.

Fred

>> Edited by tvr4ever on Friday 1st August 11:37

ScoobySnack

Original Poster:

282 posts

300 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Cheers all.

J

RichB

54,328 posts

301 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Being Pistonheads, I'd have thought by now you'd have some smart-arse telling you that mass is different to weight! Rich...

p.s. mind you didn't some poor sod get his Chimaera totaly immersed in water during the 2000 floods? - he could have calculated the mass for us!

shpub

8,507 posts

289 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
It's not. It's just the gravity of the situation that changes things...

beano500

20,854 posts

292 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
RichB said:
Being Pistonheads, I'd have thought by now you'd have some smart-arse telling you that mass is different to weight! Rich...

p.s. mind you didn't some poor sod get his Chimaera totaly immersed in water during the 2000 floods? - he could have calculated the mass for us!


Yes - but you wouldn't have been surprised either if you found that TVR weigh their vehicles on the same planet that they test the bhp, would you?

Don't start me on TVRs getting flooded, happened to me last week, but all sorted now, thank goodness!

EdT

5,194 posts

301 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
when EVO weighed the demo Cerb 2 years ago it was a fair lump heavier than advertisied ! Something like 150kg if memory serves

Ed

beano500

20,854 posts

292 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
EdT said:
when EVO weighed the demo Cerb 2 years ago it was a fair lump heavier than advertisied ! Something like 150kg if memory serves

Ed


Shouldn't have left the pies in....

ScoobySnack

Original Poster:

282 posts

300 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
you guys crack me up ..............

J

manek

2,977 posts

301 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
shpub said:
It's not. It's just the gravity of the situation that changes things...

Best place to weigh it then is at the bottom of the mid-Atlantic trench. Lowest gravity on earth, apparently.

This message brought to you by the Department of Useless Knowledge.

jigs

1,840 posts

267 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Surely that's the wrong way round, Manek - lowest gravity at highest point not lowest!

19560

13,185 posts

275 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
jigs is right, that's why the air is thinner at the top of mountains although a Griff wouldn't be much use up there. Also does the lighter have any effect?

joolzb

3,549 posts

266 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Just measured the mass of mine using a formula I remembered from school days. I've found that after factoring the fact it's got half a tank of petrol a Leven ali set and blue carpet, the official mass of a TVR Griffith to be 3.4 metres. Hope that helps.

RAW-SEWedge

970 posts

276 months

Friday 1st August 2003
quotequote all
Woosh!!!

All this gravity stuff is over my head - all I know is i couldn'r pick one up without my nuts emigrating to my neck.

Toffer

1,528 posts

278 months

Monday 4th August 2003
quotequote all
How about the Dead Sea...have to waxoil the chasis first though...

ATG

22,343 posts

289 months

Monday 4th August 2003
quotequote all
jigs said:
Surely that's the wrong way round, Manek - lowest gravity at highest point not lowest!


Nope. Manek is right. The trench has high sides, like a canyon. There is therefore a lot of matter above you, and its gravitational pull partially counters the pull from the rest of the matter beneath you.

marino

185 posts

269 months

Tuesday 5th August 2003
quotequote all
I didn't think the Atlantic had a mid ocean trench as the boundary is caused by divergent oceanic plates causing a sea mount or the Mid Atlantic Ridge. Perhaps a better place would be Challenger Deep (11,000m below sea level) where the Pacific Plate is subducting the Philippine Plate. This would also test the Blackpool factory's ability to waterproof their cars properly.

IPAddis

2,489 posts

301 months

Tuesday 5th August 2003
quotequote all
marino said:
I didn't think the Atlantic had a mid ocean trench as the boundary is caused by divergent oceanic plates causing a sea mount or the Mid Atlantic Ridge. Perhaps a better place would be Challenger Deep (11,000m below sea level) where the Pacific Plate is subducting the Philippine Plate. This would also test the Blackpool factory's ability to waterproof their cars properly.


This is just a very minor point but wouldn't the water pressure at that depth disintigrate the car into atomic particles which would then dissolve in the water and hence the car would effective be weightless.

tvr4ever

643 posts

277 months

Tuesday 5th August 2003
quotequote all
Why not use a Griffith as transport on a new Lunar mission. The power to weight ratio should be more than enough on the moon.

Fred