3rd gen weight...is this right ?
01-09-2013, 11:18 PM
#51
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 51°N 114°W, 3500'
Posts: 17,167
Likes: 0
Received 136 Likes
on
114 Posts
Car: 87 IROC L98
Engine: 588 Alcohol BBC
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: Ford 9"/31 spline spool/4.86
Re: 3rd gen weight...is this right ?
Luckily I don't race in a class that has weight restrictions. I can make my car as light as possible if I somehow could. Ballast in the nose to help keep the front end down is common in very fast cars. Go check a ProMod car someday when the body is off it and look at all the lead weights bolted to the front of the frame.
Keeping the rear glass to "add weight over the tires" is the wrong attitude. It may help some traction in a poorly setup chassis but it's still extra weight that the engine needs to move down the track. It's all about power to weight. If you want to go fast, removing the weight is easier than making more HP. If I really wanted to go faster, I'd sell off my car as a rolling chassis and drop my engine into an altered. A dragster would be nice but I have no place to put it.
Keeping the rear glass to "add weight over the tires" is the wrong attitude. It may help some traction in a poorly setup chassis but it's still extra weight that the engine needs to move down the track. It's all about power to weight. If you want to go fast, removing the weight is easier than making more HP. If I really wanted to go faster, I'd sell off my car as a rolling chassis and drop my engine into an altered. A dragster would be nice but I have no place to put it.
01-12-2013, 12:53 AM
#52
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Norwalk, Ohio
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1989 Firebird Formula
Engine: 385
Transmission: Full Manual TH350
Axle/Gears: Moser 9" 3.70
Re: 3rd gen weight...is this right ?
Slightly off topic, but Ray, were you at Norwalk in early October? I believe its your car I have many many pics of, and a video making a pass. If its you, that is one clean car. Pictures don't do it justice. I've seen it in person, and it made my jaw drop. Looking at your pictures on here, it looks to be the same 
01-14-2013, 04:43 PM
#53
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MN
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 1982 Camaro
Engine: 555 BBC
Transmission: TSI Glide
Axle/Gears: Aluminum Moser 3.89
Re: 3rd gen weight...is this right ?
Im not arguing that it is always necessary...however, most cars work best with 51-52% on the nose, using the suspension and chassis to hook the car instead of the tire alone. 55% or more on the nose wont fly with a lot of HP on a lightweight radial car...car will wheelie or spin alot.
We have several all motor cars that run faster heavier with the ballast in the rear...nothing else changed...including an n/a 468 3500lb chevelle that goes 9.1s @ 146 with a 1.23 60'
I have talked a lot with the local x275 guys bruder, rhodes, marinis, etc and they ALL use ballast...
We have several all motor cars that run faster heavier with the ballast in the rear...nothing else changed...including an n/a 468 3500lb chevelle that goes 9.1s @ 146 with a 1.23 60'
I have talked a lot with the local x275 guys bruder, rhodes, marinis, etc and they ALL use ballast...
01-15-2013, 06:25 PM
#55
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: jacksonville fl
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 firebird
Engine: sb2.2 headed sbnos
Transmission: tsi glide
Axle/Gears: 4.30
Re: 3rd gen weight...is this right ?
Damn I may need some ballast out front with the donovan block? 
01-15-2013, 09:08 PM
#56
Re: 3rd gen weight...is this right ?
Slightly off topic, but Ray, were you at Norwalk in early October? I believe its your car I have many many pics of, and a video making a pass. If its you, that is one clean car. Pictures don't do it justice. I've seen it in person, and it made my jaw drop. Looking at your pictures on here, it looks to be the same
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
