Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Weight distribution

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Ned Ludd, Feb 8, 2010.

  1. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    Who knows what their car's weight distribution is?

    It'd be interesting to see what sort of front/rear weight distribution results from different engine/frame/body/setback/wheelbase/etc. combinations.
     
  2. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    bttt, anyone?
     
  3. Dreddybear
    Joined: Mar 31, 2007
    Posts: 6,160

    Dreddybear
    Member

    On alot of these early hot rods the weight distribution is pretty good due to the engine being mounted completely behind the front axle.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2010
  4. 56oldsDarrin
    Joined: May 9, 2009
    Posts: 396

    56oldsDarrin
    Member

    you gotta weigh both ends...only way
     
  5. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    I sort of figured that, but it'd be cool to know the actual figures. I'd expect a tight range either side of 50/50 for "thin-fendered" cars.
     
  6. Dreddybear
    Joined: Mar 31, 2007
    Posts: 6,160

    Dreddybear
    Member

    I remember seeing a figure around 55/45. I can't remember where, but the number stuck with me.
     
  7. Aman
    Joined: Dec 28, 2005
    Posts: 2,522

    Aman
    Member
    from Texas

    The dynamics of WD change as the car accelerates off the starting line and down the track. A lot of it has to do with hook up at the line. So are you talking static WD or accelerated?
     
  8. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    Static. That's the baseline. Once you know that the suspension geometry will tell you what kinds of transfer dynamics to expect.
     
  9. oj
    Joined: Jul 27, 2008
    Posts: 6,589

    oj
    Member

    I don't think i've scaled a model a or similar, but the race cars with suspension i like 55% rear (other builders prefer 50%); for comparison a modern mustang is about 55% and greater on the front.
    I think suspended race cars are limited to 60%max on the rear; many race cars (prostock etal) can't get there due to engine set-back rules.
    You have an inquisitive mind there Ned, what are you fishing for?
     
  10. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 59,894

    squirrel
    Member

    seems like all the weight is up front on mine...

    You can estimate it using statics. Sum of the moments about any point equals zero.
     
  11. Hnstray
    Joined: Aug 23, 2009
    Posts: 12,357

    Hnstray
    Member
    from Quincy, IL

    Theoretically, 50/50 is desirable. However, the number of variables is staggering. Relative tire size, spring rate, center of gravity, roll center, suspension design and compatibility front to rear, are just a few that come to mind.

    It is my opinion, from years of observation, that most, certainly not all, rods and customs get whatever the builder either a) has available....b) is the current fad......c) the 'traditional way'............d) what looks good to him..........e) no concept of any geometry or physics whatsoever.......

    And, for the most part, it works, anywhere from just adequate to quite well. Mostly because it (the vehicle) isn't being tested to it's handling limits as might be the case with a race car on either a circle track or road course, unless an emergency maneuver for accident avoidance comes along.

    Ray
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2010
  12. When I get in a car, most of the weight is wherever I'm sitting.
     
    jebbesen likes this.
  13. Weasel
    Joined: Dec 30, 2007
    Posts: 6,696

    Weasel
    Member

    I scaled my Willys coupe on a public weighscale at 1680 lbs front and 1680 lbs rear with a full tank of gas and no occupants. However I would have to agree with Hnstray that option e) is by far the most common...:rolleyes:
     
  14. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    As the '31 design develops it's getting to actually sizing the hydraulics for the suspension interlinks, and that's got to do with the weight distribution, as I'd want to place "effective fulcrums" (two interlinked wheels act - under certain cir***stances - like one wheel somewhere between the two) fairly accurately. I'd thought in terms of making the system tunable from 100/0 to 0/100, but that's becoming complex and probably much heavier than I'd need. So my thinking goes, leave a 10% window for fine-tuning; but then the basics have to be sized roughly for the weight distribution I want. And that'd be somewhere between 50/50 and 45/55.

    And I'm wondering if that's where I'm going to end up. And then I'm thinking, be that as it may; which comes back to my first post: It'd be interesting to see what sort of front/rear weight distribution results from different engine/frame/body/setback/wheelbase/etc. combinations.
     
  15. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 59,894

    squirrel
    Member

    weight distribution during braking has a lot to do with vehicle dynamics..
     
  16. oj
    Joined: Jul 27, 2008
    Posts: 6,589

    oj
    Member

    Well Ned, the only real variable is the drive train. All the other stuff is pretty well situated. I recall at one time we worked out that a sbc (alum head, rods etc w/hi-nickel block) equalled 40lbs an inch, so that if the engine moved rearward 1" 40lbs would go off the front and 40lbs would add to the rear. That was a rough or rule of thumb, the weight would actually change in a percentage and all 4 corners would be affected proportionately.
    One thing to ponder in your calculations, is that there are two different static weights, the first is the actual weight and percentages of the vehicle as it sits on the scales; the second is what it wants to weight, i am speaking of all 4 corners here. If you know the corner weights, percentages then you can calculate what the car actually wants to weight.
     
  17. Ghost28
    Joined: Nov 23, 2008
    Posts: 3,192

    Ghost28
    Member

    I had a 32 chevy coupe, that was weighed by UPS at a nsra event. I t was full fendered, a small block chevy, automatic, with me in the car. And it weighed just a little over 700lbs per corner. It was almost dead even...
     
  18. rramjet
    Joined: Dec 30, 2009
    Posts: 643

    rramjet
    Member

    My 32 sedan highboy with blown sbc was 1440 front 1600 rear with me (circa 250) and not much gas in the tank.
     
  19. Ned Ludd
    Joined: May 15, 2009
    Posts: 5,506

    Ned Ludd
    Member

    Thanks. It's looking like my desired range is likely.

    Thanks. Now that's useful information.
     
  20. temper_mental
    Joined: Oct 22, 2006
    Posts: 2,717

    temper_mental
    Member
    from Texas

    Total =2744
    Front =1377 50.3%
    Rear =1357 49.6%
    Left =1377 50.3%
    Right =1357 49.6%

    BBC
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.