Pablo

iTrader: (1)

.

Shadow Z

iTrader: (2)

You need to re-edit your post back to what it was, you're very correct. I was going to explain the whole turning a 1,000 LB car Vs. 3,000 LB car (or whatever he said) a while ago, but it's just not worth it.

Some people know it all, and stating physics once proves it.

I remember watching an in-car test drive video of the Factory Five GTM. The driver, I believe it was the president of Factory Five Racing, mentioned something along of the lines of "when you turn this car, it goes where you want it to, due to being so light". Less weight essentially gives the tires more ability to influence the direction.

Willexo, if what you say is true, don't you think F1 cars would be more than barely over 1,400 pounds? Heck, most F1 cars are under 1,000 pounds, and they HAVE to add ballast to get up to the legal minimum weight. I think I'd trust what professional Formula One teams do, rather than a stranger who is explaining stuff on a forum. No offence, because there are some incredibly smart people on here, but if that's the case, wouldn't F1 cars be 3,000+ pounds?

I mean really, who wants to be able to take a turn at 6 G's, when you could have the cornering ability of an F body, I believe right around .9 G. Roughly 6.6 times less the cornering limit, now that's real performance. The lighter car can take turns at 5 to 6 G's, but that's rubbish, they secretly crash into walls.

Shadow Z

iTrader: (2)

I just noticed this reply, good call. I think for anyone who's desperate for weight reduction, they could go with something like a Dr. Gas Nascar style crossover single side exit setup, catless, and a little bullet type muffler. Dynomax, cherry bomb, etc. They'd get the crossover of something like an X pipe, so there's still the pressure equalization to aid in a continued exhaust scavenge effect after the headers. That'd be a win win IMO.



Man, this thread always makes me want to do something to the IROC. First I was going to have it rebuilt in 2010, then I decided I want to add another vehicle to the collection, my Mustang. Then I sort of wanted to rebuild and stroke it out to a 383 after I bought the Mustang, but I'd much rather swap a Tick Performance built T56 into the Mustang, and buy another daily driver type car. Probably a VW Jetta TDI Diesel as a back up car.

Maybe one of these days I'll bite the bullet, and order up a bunch of fiberglass goodies from VFN (fiberglass doors, fiberglass dash, a flat stock style fiberglass full pin on hood, and full lexan to boot, especially for the fiberglass doors), a PA Racing K member, and just finally order up a 383 stroker kit from Eagle. I think it'd be pretty safe to say it'd be under 3,000 pounds then. LOL.

Gumby

Look at a F1 car, weight is only half the answer.

You forget all the wings they use to keep the thing planted to the ground.
[Which includes a full belly pan. Even if you ignore the topside body style.]
They make up for a lack of weight with aero downforce.

Why Danica can't drive in Nascar, she is lost without all that aero downforce to keep her planted / has no idea how to drive a car fast and lose, she expects that slot car feel of a Indy car.
-------
EDIT
Some google searching, can't say if its 100% accurate/ rounded off numbers;
around 70 MHP a F1 Indy car has 600KG / 1323lbs of downforce, around 150 MPH it has 2000KG / 4409lbs / 2.2tons of downforce.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

I deleted it because trying to correct some of the nonsense posted is really more aggravating than it is worth. To really explain all the forces involved and why lighter is always (practically speaking) better requires an understanding of the forces, vectors, how static and sliding friction works, etc. Since I am not an engineer, much less a professor of engineering I decided to just spare myself the aggravation of trying to explain something that I know but may not be completely qualified to explain to someone in a clear and concise manner.

Suffice it to say that in every sanctioned racing class in the world, a primary goal if not THE primary goal is to get the car as close to the minimum weight allowable. That should tell you something.

Gumby

While at the same time adding as much allowable down force / wing area.
Why there are wing rules.

Just saying that races go for less weight is the key to speed is dumb, take all the wings off a Indy car and have fun going fast, same with a top fuel dragster or the lowest class tube chassis car.

Are you gonna put a whale wing on your 1000lb 3rd gen???
Gonna need a hood wing also ig you wanna turn that or knightrider gen two air foils out the fenders.

jensen73110

iTrader: (4)

That wasn't the argument. It was that all things being equal, a 1000 lb car hits the wall and the 3500 lb car turns the corner. THAT is garbage. And weight does have a massive factor in racing. All things being equal, add 1000 lbs to an F1 or Top Fuel car and you'll watch the heavy car lose.

If I could get a 3rd gen to 1000 pounds, absolutely. An ugly F1 front splitter under the nose too. Then I'd take it to the road course and beat the **** out of everything.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Weight and downforce have different effects. If they were the same, it would be a lot cheaper to add weight to an F1 car than spend hundreds of thousands perhaps millions of dollars in wind tunnel testing.

The thing about down force is that is all it is, providing more compressive force for your tires relative to speed. Weight is always there regardless of speed and has the nasty side affect of increasing inertia. An object traveling in one direction requires force to change direction. That force increases with the more inertia something has. A change in direction is any change in direction. The most extreme example is going the completely opposite direction. If you think about it like this, its a lot easier to understand why a heavier vehicle like a freight train takes a long time to stop. It has a lot of mass moving one way and to make that change you have to impart a lot of force.
Here is another way of looking at it, tie a rope to a weight and spin it around your head. A light weight is easier to spin and requires less energy on your part to keep from moving. Add weight to it and now you suddenly have to work harder to keep from traveling outward with the weight. In this scenario you are kind of like a tire and you are applying a centripetal force. Do you want to try and wield a heavy car around you or a light one?

Here is a link with the actual math behind this if you want to crunch the numbers and see for yourself
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html
And ironically enough their example involves a car turning on a road. Perfect for this discussion.
Downforce as you can see is not part of the equation. Downforce does not change the centripetal force required to make a turn, it only increases the compressive forces on the tire so that they grip more.

willexoIX

Thank you gumby for illustrating my point.

and to the rest of you, did you even read my post??
Downforce helps to glue a F1 car to the road, negating the low weight.
Take all aerodynamic parts off of a formula one car, then take the turn at the same speed. Anyone care to give the answer as to what happens?

My point was that too much weight reduction without taking into account all of the other aspects is going to hurt more than help.

don't change anything other than weight on a third gen. stock tires, suspension, aero, etc...
say you take the hatch off, what happens? it adversely affects the traction and the rear will spin easier, due to reduced TRACTION. same applies for the rest of the car, remove too much weight and the car wont handle worth a damn. Upgrade EVERYTHING needed and yes, it will handle like a dream.

My initial point was made with ZERO aerodynamic forces for the sake of the argument.

When I was in physics a month ago, any lab we did involved removing friction from the equation. What I did was the same to SIMPLIFY what I was saying.

Which soapbox derby car goes farther, heavier or lighter? The heavier one goes farther due to inertia.

The point still stands. NOT involving aerodynamics.

900HP 1000lb car will NOT turn like a 900HP 3000lb car because the 1000lb car just has the weight taken off with NO other changes.

I had this conversation with my physics professor 2 months ago, so what you are trying to say is that my physics professor, who has 7 MASTERS DEGREES IS WRONG?

willexoIX

Actually if you take aerodynamics out of the equation, then that is EXACTLY what happens.

willexoIX

This is pretty close to correct, take all of the aerodynamics off of the car and tell me what happens when you try to turn at 150mph.

thanks for that info gumby.

If any of you would actually take the time TO READ MY POST, then you would have understood that I was only illustrating WEIGHT in the argument, all else is removed for the sake of the argument.
THIS IS WHAT WE DO IN PHYSICS.
remove variables to SIMPLIFY the equation, and work it in parts to better understand the underlying physics properties.


If you all want to argue with me, do it elsewhere instead of cluttering a WEIGHT REDUCTION THREAD.

BACK ON TOPIC.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

You study physics? Yikes.

Shouldn't you be able to tell us that the net force can increase to infinity because angular velocity can also increase to infinity? If so, how does that square with the fact that the normal force (tire to road) is not increasing? And doesn't angular velocity in this case end up meaning more centripetal force? Hmm...

Now I'm just a simple man with a H.S. diploma but help me understand. Doesn't that mean that your tire is only going to see a fixed amount of force pushing it down (normal force, the force of gravity doesnt change in a turn) but a theoretically unlimited amount of force provided laterally?

You oughta be able to do some vector addition to come up with the net force imparted on this imaginary tire and get back to us to show how a heavier car will corner better. All these years people seem to have had it wrong.

I'm just wondering how two forces, one of which is finite vertically and the other infinite laterally can end up with a net force that is greatest vertically. You might be on to some nobel peace prize stuff here.

If I've come to the wrong conclusion, can you explain how a tire can have infinite lateral adhesion? I mean, this tire of yours is going to need to have it since the centripetal force is pretty much provided by friction alone. And we've already agreed that theres no limit to the amount of centripetal force out there... but gravity stays the same.


Anyway like I said I'm not school educated so I'd be glad to have someone who is chime in.

Relevance to this thread? LIGHTER IS FASTER (aside from separate issues of weight distribution, sprung to unsprung weight ratios, etc) Also should add that this is all practically speaking. There are some scenarios where this stuff doesn't apply but they have to do with drastically reduced friction.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

BTW a lighter rear makes a car more prone to understeer not oversteer. Might want to look up polar moment of inertia. Of course this is a very dynamic environment so a lot of things come into play that can affect this outcome.

Gumby

Yea Im not always talking out my tail pipe

side not
Hasn't GM always kept some weight into their cars so it wasn't like skating on ice in just the rain? They could of easily took the Furd shortcut using tiny light crap boxs with a big engine but no and thank God.

Gimme a GM tank with a big engine any day, over a tin can-o-death.

willexoIX

wow, just wow.
Clearly someones reading comprehension is well below a HS level.

Answer the question, don't dodge it.
The F1 car, with ZERO downforce tries to take a turn at 150MPH.
What happens????
Answer - It becomes incredibly unstable, correct?

Clearly again you didn't read the post.
The idea was just to use WEIGHT, only WEIGHT, and nothing but WEIGHT; not downforce, vectors, etc... as the example.

The point was that if you take too much weight off of a car, without lowering, upgrading tires, suspension, and aero parts, as well as not keeping the weight distribution as close to 50/50 as possible, then the car is going to handle like crap. All over the road, spinning, etc...

As this may not apply to most 3rd gens, clearly the assumption that "lighter cars will always handle better" doesn't have enough information to prove the point; which is why I chimed in.

So if you do take too much weight off without upgrading all of the other variables that go into upgrading/tuning a car, it will hurt more than help.
Agreed?

Also, someone debated that downforce and weight are not one in the same. Partially correct.
Downforce presses down on the vehicle, just as weight would, without actually adding the weight.

For a formula one car, obviously they aren't going to just tack on weight to make the car handle better, because that would adversly affect the performance of the engine and the whole car. Instead, they turn to downforce, way less weight added, however at higher speeds it pushes the car downwards, creating high pressure zones that press down on the car, simulating a higher weight to glue it to the road.

Same way that lift allows for a massive object to lift into the air, simulating lower weight.

If you remove too much weight from a car without touching anything else, it will cause the car to rise, giving air a larger area to stagnate under the car and provide lift, making the car unstable. The heavier car will however sit lower to the ground, lessening the amount of air that will stagnate under the car.

I tried to simplify it, but clearly that was mistaken for me being wrong.
I'm sorry if everyone doesn't completely understand physics, but if we start throwing around all of the terms and equations used in the physics world, to the others it would be considered a language they never learned.

bl85c

iTrader: (2)

I want a light gm tank with a small motor. 700hp and 2800lbs with me. Infinite pedal to floor force haha.

When you remove weight from a car without adjusting ride height (depending on where the majority of the weight is removed) you also change the roll center and suspension geometry. Small changes to weight bias (and hence roll center) can have a dramatic effect. Take too much weight off the back and the car will pivot closer to the steering making it act like a wheelbarrow. Too much off the front will make it pivot closer to the axle making it act like a bacwards tricycle.

Gumby

Id say that depends on if you ever had a bad crash.
Im truley fearful of to much power in my Firebird, as much as I have done its still a bit tin-cany for me.

Though Id have no fear of driving my Buick wagon through a brick house.

bl85c

iTrader: (2)

Once I get it to that point it's only going to the track and home. In the meantime I'm going to keep it at 6psi which is good for 400hp. I need to get a racing block and have rods & pistons machined for the 3500 crank before I wick it up to 20psi.

jensen73110

iTrader: (4)

Yes, it's probably the reason he doesn't have a doctorate.


That makes sense, but it wasn't your original arguement. We can't read in to what you are thinking. Going by just the words on your post on the previous page, you used 3rd grade logic. Next time, please explain your thoughts completely. Physics 1 isn't multivariable vector calculus. We can take it.


But this is 3rdgen.org. Our cars are cheap tanks. We can't practically take off "too much" weight. We can take off "about" 500 pounds before going really nuts. And all things being equal (aero, tires, suspension, weight distribution), the lighter car will go faster and turn better. That's why this thread exists. If someone did ALL the ideas in this thread, they might have to do some suspension tweaking. And then they would have a kick *** car.

willexoIX

If you read the original post, then yes it was the original argument.

Wasn't really pointed at the 3rd gen, was pointed out at the comment, "a lighter car will always outhandle the heavier one". Not enough information to justify the statement.

the point was to not just to take off weight, but to apply other upgrades where required to keep the car in balance.

you said : And all things being equal (aero, tires, suspension, weight distribution), the lighter car will go faster and turn better.

You are correct; but the only thing in the original argument was weight, with nothing else applied.

B4Ctom1

Screw thirdgens, I'm getting a Fiero with a LS9 and 6T75 tranny.

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

A little more info on titanium exhaust... Some Japanese company designed an exhaust system made out of titanium for the BMW M5.
http://www.bulletproofautomotive.com...il.php?ID=6426

In this link you can see pics of it under the car which are pretty cool.
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/e60...ader-back.html

Guess how much this one costs? 12,000$ I like the look of it tho.. But if you look at the weight savings, that's around 80lbs on that car! (I'm sure that the dual exhaust systems on our cars are just as heavy if not heavier!)

If you have the cash and are a millionaire then I guess this is the exhaust for you

ericjon262

heavy Vs light handling is just like an engine change a parameter, change your tune, with an engine, you change your fuel and spark, with weight you change your ride height spring pressure tires ect...

lighter will make your car faster and handle better once re-tuned for the decreased weight.

momentum will keep your car wanting to go strait, a heavier car will have more momentum, a lighter will have less. pick up a spruce 2x4 hold it in your hands, and spin your self around. now pick up a pressure treated yellow pine 2x4 and spin around, which was harder to hold onto? the lighter one, or the heavy one? of course the heavier one is harder to hold, because it has more momentum than the lighter one. same principle with you car, except your hands are the road and the 2x4s are your car.

edit:

LOL, better beef up that 6t75! theres a guy with an LS7/F40(6 speed manual transaxle) Fiero, I imagine thats silly fast enough.

Mr.K

Im curious where im at. My front wheels are weld 3.5 inch prostars and my rears are 8 inch cragar street stars with some heavy street tires at the time being. my car has an iron head lt1/t56 and a ford 9in with a 3.5 inch aluminum drive shaft joining them. The exhaust is a 3inch single with no cat and shorty headers. I stripped all the ac/heater parts and made a nice plate for the firewall, all the accessories are gone save for an alt bracket and the alt, I have an s10 steering box, I have jaz seats with covers and fixed brackets that are direct to the floor and my back seats are out, my battery is relocated in the trunk with a taylor kit. Next things i have on my list are crank windows and installing my aluminum heads.

B4Ctom1

What about soft manual shifts with this G6 6-speed manual?
http://www.v8archie.com/v8Archie/Prod3.htm

or

maybe I could run the 6 speed auto but program into the ECM a massive ignition retard on shifts.

also

a few companies are hyping up the 6T75 already, many more to come I bet.

85projectZ28

had to subscribe. its a long read! but last time i checked, i weighed in at 3440 with a full tank of gas and me in it (i weigh 165). since then i have removed the heater core, blower motor, A/C canister, hoses, wiper motor, wiper blades, washer fluid reservoir and all brackets and wires associated with those. once i get her running again, i will weigh again and post the number.

crazybird

i bet mine has ya beat, i just dont know how to weight it!

1991CamaroRslow

iTrader: (3)

What happened to this poor thread Anyone catch the magazine article where they chopped up an old L98 vette to get it as light as possible, they touch on what happens when too much weight is removed. I took a couple hundred pounds off my car and it's better everywhere btw

85projectZ28

I weighed mine by going to the local transfer station aka dump. they weigh trucks before and after to charge you for dumping trash. i just drove onto the scale on a slow day and 3440 popped up on the display. i told them i just wanted to weigh my car and they were cool about it. try that. that was with me in it at 160lbs and a full tank of gas.

Which article had that chopped up vette?

Im going all out on mine, pretty much. but its an expensive build so it will take a while.
heres what ive done...

smog delete
ac delete
heater core delete
heater box and blower motor delete
wiper blades, motor and assembly delete
washer fluid reservoir and pump delete
fiberglass hood
(I know theres more but I cant think of them now...)

heres what Im going with...

BMR tubular k-member
BMR tubular front control arms
coil over front kit
s10 steering box
power steering delete
aluminum-
heads
water pump
radiator
driveshaft
mini starter
lighter weight slotted front disc brakes
(again, I'm sure theres more but I cant remember now...)

My plan is to get it to 2800 - 2900lbs with me in it and a full tank of gas, use it as a street legal weekend warrior with 490 hp!

I WILL post proof of that when I get there.

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Personally I wouldn't remove wiper blades just in case it rains or something.. You never know.. Wouldn't that make it not street legal?

Also, the coil over conversion on our cars isn't the best idea because it puts all of the stress/load on the strut tower caps which are very thin sheet metal. I'm sure with a big enough bump it would rip right through it. There are other reasons why (such as the spring turning as you turn the wheel. Bad idea.) but that is why unless it's a drag only car and you're not planning on doing any handling with it, then it's pretty much not recommended. But I guess since you're getting rid of power steering then it might be what's in your plans..

stage20

iTrader: (3)

ive had coilovers on my car for over 5 years. 2ft wheelies and weekend driving. no issues.
i dont think there is any advantage to a coilover on these cars if you carve the corners. stick with a full spring.

stage20

iTrader: (3)

that might be a tough one.
ive got the lightest of everything on my car car is still very streetable and complete interior, back seat, stock gas tank, stock glass etc. its pretty much stripped otherwise. coilovers, pinto rack. my car is 2995 on a set of scales empty. still has the bumper supports, so thats 50 pounds there. tough to get them down and keep them in one piece.

mw66nova

iTrader: (13)

btw, the BMR k-member is one of the heavier k-members available on the market. as is the spohn. after much research, if weight is a key factory, i'd look at the Racecraft, PARacing, or AJE k-members.

stage20

iTrader: (3)

pass on the aje. racecraft makes an excellent piece. ive got a PA myself. about the only thing out when i put one in. mild steel unit is only 21#. the moly is a few pounds less.

85projectZ28

the wiper blades coming off wont be a problem. its going to be a weekend warrior that is street legal and capable of daily driving. i will not ever be taking it out in the rain or snow. it will stay in my garage till the nice weekends when i go out and tear up the town or take it to the local strip or car show!

check out the spohn coil over kits on hawksthirdgenparts.com they have a plate that goes under and sandwiches the strut tower. that coupled with a 3 point strut tower bar and it will be unstopable!

as for the weight, i figured i would get a skeptic or two, but i am pretty confident and i love to prove people wrong, this is just gunna take time.

the tubular bmr k-member is less than half the weight of the factory piece. im not sure of numbers but i think its like 54 for the oem and 23 for the bmr. plus it a similar drop for the control arms. and then most of the aftermarket front disc brake kits are aluminum and all claim to shed aprox 35 lbs off the front end. any little bit adds up and thats my goal is to find them all and utilize them to the fullest!

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

there's tons of ways to lighten up our cars but all the lightweight parts are big money. Like for example, custom carbon fiber parts for our cars would be terribly expensive but would make a HUGE difference (doors, hood, hatch, fenders, bumper, other panels, driveshaft, etc.).

-A full cromemoly tubular suspension all around would save alot
-Racecraft spindles are light
-Aluminum caliper disc brakes with drilled and slotted rotors would be lighter (depending on how big the rotors and calipers are.. it could end up being heavier if say you have 6 piston/14" rotor brakes)
-Santhuff alumninum struts and shocks
-Aluminum block (LS1,2,3,6,7)
-aluminum water pump
-mini starter
-lightweight rad
-titanium exhaust (SUPER LIGHTWEIGHT, but ridiculously expensive, probably 12,000$ for a custom one made)
-Lightweight battery (odyssey makes small 13lbs batts)
-lexan t-tops (if you can find them, and i would only use these for racing since they would probably crack during regular street use)
-aluminum front and rear crash bars
-lightweight seats
-lighter magnesium wheels (like the vette weels of I forget which year)

and all the other miscellaneous little things that can add up. I even think a 9" midwest chassis rear end with aluminum center section is actually lighter than the stock 10 bolt IIRC (probably eats up more HP though, but for weight I think it's lighter and insanely stronger).

Also I think there is a company that made springs that were 33% lighter than stock (Vaughtland IIRC), but the spring rates on those sucked IMO.

If you had a 700R4 and converted to manual if you put in a 5 speed it would be alot lighter (although weaker unless you beefed it up). IIRC a 6 speed is the same weight or similar as the 700R4.

With all this you'd probably save around I don't know 500-600 pounds, maybe more. That would get you under 3000lbs. I've done an insane amount of weight reduction, but it's still streetable and I'm at 3350lbs (without me in it, full tank). The goal (for me, atleast) is to keep the car streetable and "as stock as possible" and reduce weight without anyone noticing that something was "deleted" just to save a few lbs. Personally I'd rather spend money and keep as many features as possible. But that's just me.

stage20

iTrader: (3)

a lot of drag guys are going with aluminum exhaust and saving a ton. id like to do it myself. a guy on yellowbullet makes aluminum mufflers any side you want.

BlackenedBird

iTrader: (5)

Well, after reading all 8 pages today & compiling all the weight specs listed here into a Excel spreadsheet, in weight order high to low...It certainly was interesting to see what would give the biggest weight for dollar benefit & what the little things adding up would give. And the few things that didn't seem worth it for the dollar spent.

Now that I have it all compiled into a Master List, instead of spread out over 8 web pages & 387 posts, I'm gonna weigh some of my stuff around here to add to it, then organize other charts into parts of the car. IE:Suspension/Engine/Interior/Body, etc.

Looking at the list all together certainly gives me some ideas to do to my car!

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

BlackenedBird: Awesome idea! I think if you post that it should be a sticky thread actually!

jensen73110

iTrader: (4)

^I'd be interested in seeing that. Can Excel files be attached in here?

BlackenedBird

iTrader: (5)

I dunno if Excel file can be uploaded her, but I kinda doubt it.

I'm gonna weigh what little stuff I have laying around to add to the list, before I try to post it. And after I here from the TGO Admins as to whether or not it is allowed.

Keep in mind these are just Member shared weights, not verified by me (the writer). If 2 weights were posted for the same item, I used the lower of the 2 #s so that if anybody ever checked theirs & got a higher #, they would just be happy & not gripe that the Excel #s were wrong since theirs were not that high. In other words...No whining allowed if your numbers don't match!

And if anybody has any weights they want added that they didn't see in this thread already listed, feel free to PM me with them & I'll add them.

85projectZ28

That sounds like an awesome little project! Thanks for the work! I will PM you with my seats when I take them out. Thanks again.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

That's an excellent idea BlackenedBird. I hope you are able to post it.

BlackenedBird

iTrader: (5)

I just got through going through some of my items & was surprised by a few.

All weights here & in my chart as singles unless indicated as a pair (pr).

89 GTA door (PW/PL/PM/no door panel) - 84.5lbs
Firebird/GTA/Formula front fender - 14lbs
Headlamp assembly complete - 16.5lbs

Chart is up to 128 lines! I question certain items like the 91/92 Camaro 16" wheels. Fronts 21lbs, rears 17lbs? Why a 4lb difference for the same size? Not that big a difference in the hub for the different backspacing.

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

When he posts it, we can all give our feedback to keep it as accurate as possible.

sailtexas186548

iTrader: (2)

the "physics" explanations in this thread regarding weight... holy ***** weight = downforce yuhh right.

I'm curious about the aluminum exhaust, aluminum melts at ~900 F correct? how close to a turbo/headers is Al exhaust able to get? I imagine it would be a streetable mod unless there is some underlying issue?

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

No idea about aluminum but probably after the cat it would be okay.. Mine doesn't get that hot after the cat..

B4Ctom1

I made this to be added:

BlackenedBird

iTrader: (5)

If that is the same thing you posted here before, I already got it.

In fact, that was the hardest to do. All the others I could highlight, Copy & Paste. Yours is just a JPEG pic, so I had to hand write all that down, then hand type it all in. Not much by itself, but after 8 pages of stuff? I darn near didn't add those weights!

So if something is posted here already in this thread? I have it. 128 lines now, so it was too long to be saved as a .txt document.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Don't know if you got this yet but I just weighed a 91 Z28 cloth power seat, 42 lbs