Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > General Discussions > General Chat
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-05-2004, 11:17 PM   #1
zipper
CF Newbie
 
zipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: US
Posts: 76
50/50 Weight Destribution

I was wondering why so many cars try to strive for a perfect 50/50 balance. Obviously, when the car is stopped it is best to be balanced but I heard it is better to have more weight on the wheel that is powered like in a RWD, better to have 45/55 for better handling. Is this true and why?
__________________
zipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 02:55 AM   #2
mazda6man
im JDM TITE YO!
 
mazda6man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,158
basically, on a RWd car for instance... if all the weight was in the front, there would be no traction in the back... if all the weight was in the back for traction... there wouldnt be anything pushing down the tires in front to help you turn... so basically yes, something like 45/55 in a RWD car is good because there is slightly more weight on the back tires for going, and a little less for being abole to have your front tires do something
__________________
I = JDM titeness
Toyota 4 Life;
I rock X Chassis Toyotas daily
My rides = 1992 Cressida aka "the Cressy"
1985 Cressida aka "pain in my asshole"

mazda6man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 04:49 PM   #3
jcutsh
CF Enthusiast
 
jcutsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by zipper
I was wondering why so many cars try to strive for a perfect 50/50 balance. Obviously, when the car is stopped it is best to be balanced but I heard it is better to have more weight on the wheel that is powered like in a RWD, better to have 45/55 for better handling. Is this true and why?

In order to develop a good handling car, we want to develop maximum grip in all directions, with minimum drag. This will give us the fastest speeds through the corners. We will need to find the optimum tradeoff between straightaway and cornering speeds; on short, twisty roads or tracks, we'll be faster with a car that emphasizes good cornering, while on fast roads or tracks with long straights we'll go quicker with a car that sacrifices some cornering for straightaway speed.

We want the car's handling to be balanced; that is, when it reaches its limits of adhesion, we want both the front tires and the rear tires to begin to slide at the same time, at the same rate. If the car is not balanced, either the front tires will begin to slide first, and we'll slide straight off the road, or the rear tires will begin to slide first, and the car will spin.

We also want the car to be forgiving. That means that its behavior is predictable and consistent, and when it starts to slide, we want the slide to be progressive rather than sudden. We'd like it to begin to let go gently, with some warning, and get fairly deep into a slide before it becomes uncontrollable.

All of these things require tradeoffs. If we break down the many factors affecting cornering, braking, and traction into manageable parts, then the best place to start is with a well balanced car. If itís just a drag car then we want weight to the driven wheels for the best traction.

We could care less what the car weighs setting still.
__________________
John

Robert Benchley (1889-1945) noted, "no matter how well-intended, any reply to a dumba$$ question will inevitably appear smarta$$ed"
jcutsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 01:02 AM   #4
cinqyg
CF Freak
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Midlands, England
Posts: 851
I think you have to be mindful to frame the answer within thequestion, really depends on your aplication. And the layout of the car, midengined RWD is the proven formula or all out speed, difficult to go shopping in though.
cinqyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 07:15 PM   #5
jcutsh
CF Enthusiast
 
jcutsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinqyg
I think you have to be mindful to frame the answer within thequestion, really depends on your aplication. And the layout of the car, midengined RWD is the proven formula or all out speed, difficult to go shopping in though.
And perhaps you should learn how to read! Zipper asked WHY do we want our cars to be balanced. He didn't ask which car was better, but WHY. I think I answered that better than you.

If you like mid engine cars so much you should get a Pontiac Fiero or a Fiat X/19. Both mid engine, and both complete failures.

The Miata is a front engine rwd car, yet less then a case of beer (short cans) keeps it from being in perfect balance.
Its powers on the race track are becoming epic. It constantly passes Z06's and Vipers due to its balance, not its power.

There are no mid engine cars in NASCAR, that I am aware of, infact an F1 would not do well at Daytona, due to its balance.

I willing to let Zipper determine who's answer he felt was the most help.
__________________
John

Robert Benchley (1889-1945) noted, "no matter how well-intended, any reply to a dumba$$ question will inevitably appear smarta$$ed"
jcutsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 07:37 PM   #6
BavarianWheels
Supreme Demagogue
 
BavarianWheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 3,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcutsh
If you like mid engine cars so much you should get a Pontiac Fiero or a Fiat X/19. Both mid engine, and both complete failures.

My first car was an X/19! I loved it. Great dry weather handling...heavy and quite the freeway zip and sized needed to get around here in So. Cal.

It had it's problems, but if I kept up the maintenance, I really had no problem.

I'd buy one in a heart-beat. But fuel injected this time.
.
.
__________________

Bav's Favorite Track Vehicle
Posts Deleted for Use of Profanity = 2
BavarianWheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 07:59 PM   #7
jcutsh
CF Enthusiast
 
jcutsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by BavarianWheels
My first car was an X/19! I loved it. Great dry weather handling...heavy and quite the freeway zip and sized needed to get around here in So. Cal.

It had it's problems, but if I kept up the maintenance, I really had no problem.

I'd buy one in a heart-beat. But fuel injected this time.
.
.

Yea I had one too. It was a nice little car, but no track winner.

I am sorry, just lost my head there for a min. I get upset with complainers who don't add to the discussion.
__________________
John

Robert Benchley (1889-1945) noted, "no matter how well-intended, any reply to a dumba$$ question will inevitably appear smarta$$ed"
jcutsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 08:07 PM   #8
BavarianWheels
Supreme Demagogue
 
BavarianWheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 3,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcutsh
Yea I had one too. It was a nice little car, but no track winner.
I'd sure like to try though...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcutsh
I am sorry, just lost my head there for a min. I get upset with complainers who don't add to the discussion.
I wasn't offended...
.
.
__________________

Bav's Favorite Track Vehicle
Posts Deleted for Use of Profanity = 2
BavarianWheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 09:46 PM   #9
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
X 1/9s not track winners? Maybe not drag strip winners (barely enough power to move them around in stock form) but certainly excellent at everything road race and autocross related.

This was my last one:



It was an '81, carburated 1.5. Excellent little car, and a fabulous autocrosser. It used to be hard to get power from them, but I've found that the X1/9 racing community is very knowledgeable and helpful anymore, and making fast ones is pretty easy.

I also had one with the engine and trans replaced by a 2110cc air cooled VW engine and hewland transaxle. HUGE torque in a small package. Essentially the rear of the car was relplaced with what looked to be a formula car setup. Fun street car, but after a friend bought it, he was messing with the fuel system and burned the car down (how hard is it to make sure you've tightened the fuel lines down before test driving the car?)
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 10:03 PM   #10
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcutsh
If you like mid engine cars so much you should get a Pontiac Fiero or a Fiat X/19. Both mid engine, and both complete failures.

The Fiat was a failure for reasons that had nothing to do with engine placemetn: rust from using inferior Russian steel alloys, poor electrical grounding, and poor parts availiability in the US. Dynamically, however, it was fabulous.

The Fiero, again, was a failure for reasons other than it's engine palcement. Since GM brass wouldn't let Pontiac engineers have the sports car/GT they originally wanted, they went back and scavenged cheaper off the shelf parts and retuned it as a commuter car. Management said, that's better, and sold it. Of course, immediately, the engineers started redoing it in the manner they originally wanted, providing foirst a much better GT version, then an actually outstanding Formula vrsion before management decided that it should die (and that was becaeu the early ones, in their wannabe commuter mode, were poorly executed and hit a market that didn't exist. Had the Formula bne the first model out, rather than the woefully anemic 2M4, the car would have been a success in the eyes of sports car afficianados)
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2004, 10:24 PM   #11
BavarianWheels
Supreme Demagogue
 
BavarianWheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 3,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV


It was an '81, carburated 1.5. Excellent little car, and a fabulous autocrosser. It used to be hard to get power from them, but I've found that the X1/9 racing community is very knowledgeable and helpful anymore, and making fast ones is pretty easy.

Oh... ::sigh:: ...the memories are flowing freely. Mine was a '76 and it seemed to weigh a ton! I could barely get it above 90mph...

With the targa top off...the wind in my hair...Van Halen on the cassette player, I was in heaven!

Mine was Canary yellow just like this one below with the double bumpers...

.
But no luggage rack. Both front and rear bumpers were the same. I integrated some Hella Driving Lights in between the front bumpers nicely and wired them to the interior light(?) switch on the console inside. It was cool! (to me) I could run with only the driving lights on at night...at least I never had problems with cops. It had some nice basketweave type alluminum wheels that I just loved!

I had also taken rubbing compound to the engine lid and made it shine like freshly spilled oil! It only took a whole day!
.
.
__________________

Bav's Favorite Track Vehicle
Posts Deleted for Use of Profanity = 2
BavarianWheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2004, 07:32 AM   #12
cinqyg
CF Freak
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Midlands, England
Posts: 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcutsh
And perhaps you should learn how to read! Zipper asked WHY do we want our cars to be balanced. He didn't ask which car was better, but WHY. I think I answered that better than you.

If you like mid engine cars so much you should get a Pontiac Fiero or a Fiat X/19. Both mid engine, and both complete failures.

The Miata is a front engine rwd car, yet less then a case of beer (short cans) keeps it from being in perfect balance.
Its powers on the race track are becoming epic. It constantly passes Z06's and Vipers due to its balance, not its power.

There are no mid engine cars in NASCAR, that I am aware of, infact an F1 would not do well at Daytona, due to its balance.

I willing to let Zipper determine who's answer he felt was the most help.

It depends what you call a failer, look at the M12, GT40, ferrari's, lambo's, lotus esprit,elise, exige, vx220, MR2 i wouldnt call them a failer.

Well may be a F1 car wouldnt do well at daytona but they arnt designed for that are they, thats like taking a NASCAR and entering it in the paris to dakar desert rally.
cinqyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.