RickRick
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 03:55 PM |
|
|
Lightest BEC kit
asume the same engine and components are used, and no extra light options, which 7 style bec kit is the lightest
|
|
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 03:58 PM |
|
|
The newest Mac#1 Worx RR, ive been told, takes some beating. Talk to bigrich.
Welcome to the madhouse. I like your first post. Im just off for some popcorn and a comfy seat to watch the show (you will soon see why!)
And guys / gals - play fair. Although not said above lets assume on the road, wet weight without driver and with wheels on (and number plates, full
tank of fuel, coolant, engine oil, bonnet etc etc etc measured using verifiable weighing device).
[Edited on 22/8/07 by DarrenW]
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 04:01 PM |
|
|
unless your 4ft 11 and weigh 6 stone I wouldnt worry about it
most of the manafacturers cars can be easily got down to 450kg
after that all of the cars can be took lighter as most use the same parts
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
TimC
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 04:02 PM |
|
|
Raw Striker - almost certainly!
TC
|
|
|
worX
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 04:09 PM |
|
|
Raw Striker!!
Even though you state "same engine" etc. you need to pay specific attention to components to get a lighter weight build.
I know at this point you are just trying to find a start to eventually END UP with a light car, but there are so many things be aware of.
I cut all my bolts to length +1.5 thread pitches for example 
hth
Steve
Edited to add I didn't feel it necessary to sacrifice the looks of the car though to be honest and stuck with 15" wheels. I will
get some lightweight 13"s one day, and at the same time I will make a custom loom as I didn't strip my loom back during the build, because
I wasn't confident enough at the time!
[Edited on 22/8/07 by worX]
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 04:28 PM |
|
|
MNR's VortX can be built with thin wall high strength steel and thin GRP or CF bodywork. With the same engine and donor parts, that would make
it pretty light. You might get better results spending that money on wheels and brakes to get lightness.
|
|
|
Ivan
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 04:45 PM |
|
|
I have read elsewhere or here - can't remember where that a live axle is lighter overall than independant rear suspension so that might be
somewhere to lose weight.
|
|
|
lococost
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 05:16 PM |
|
|
I always presumed the R1ot was the lightest, transmission is bound to weigh way less than anyting on a sierra or escort base. You have to get used to
the looks though  .
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 05:22 PM |
|
|
Steve, cutting threads off the bolt !
Go on a diet you fat b*stard
Next you'll be having that carbon stuff on your car
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
RickRick
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 07:19 PM |
|
|
it was more of a question just out of interest i think i'll be going for the mnr vortx kit, and slapping in an r1
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
This is the type of question that a more regular user would post or one that recently departed and re-registered.
I was expecting some more controversial answers i must say.
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 10:55 PM |
|
|
MK Engineering have built an aluminium tubed chassis Indy... apparently this was extremely light.
Depends how much you want to pay...
Steve
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 22/8/07 at 11:17 PM |
|
|
and in the case of the ali (if its the special they did for Ron Champion) how long you want it to last before fatigue sets in.
|
|
|
marc n
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 07:27 AM |
|
|
quote:
asume the same engine and components are used, and no extra light options, which 7 style bec kit is the lightest
they will all be the sameish on bare chassis weight just not in strength
the way to a light car is attention to detail as mentioned in other threads, i.e trimming bolts down ( can save over 2kg on a whole car ) using
caphead bolts rather than hex head small amonuts singularly but quite impressive when you add up a car of nuts and bolts
the main variance in weights is the parts you will bolt onto your car
best regards
marc
please email rather than u2u
direct workshop email ( manned 8am till 6pm )
www.mnrltd.co.uk enquireys to :-
chrismnrltd@btinternet.com
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 08:35 AM |
|
|
Would it be fair to conclude that any road / track car sub-450Kg is bloody impressive? I bet 5 - 10 years ago people were chasing sub 550Kg.
Is there a point at which the lightweight of the car and rather fantastic power that the bike engines are capable of becomes an issue for handling and
traction? Im sure someone will be able to make 2 cars from basically the same kit - one at 450Kg and another at say 390Kg. Would it be possible that
the 450Kg car could have better handling and traction and hence be quicker around a circuit? (Acedemic question as to get to 390Kg this car would need
to have some significant different equipment bolted to it which would skew the test result i guess).
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 09:03 AM |
|
|
It's a good question. Matt at Procomp has certainly made the comment about dampers becoming more critical as the car gets lighter.
I am equally concerned about the correlation between weight of wallet and weight of car!
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 12:16 PM |
|
|
The only time I can envisage a lighter car of the same spec losing out is if the tyres are not designed to work at such light weight, so dont heat up
properly etc, but the difference between say 520kgs with driver on board and 460kgs isnt going to put trackday rubber like A048s out of kilter.
As the rest is down to physics having less mass to accelerate / deccelerate / corner, the lighter car should always be the quicker.
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 07:32 PM |
|
|
Hi no reason attall why a seven type can not be built to under 400kg whithout going to mad.
The ST locost with blade wet weighed in at 420 in race trim whithout all the expencive alloy parts ect.
Many raw strikers have been built below 400 and there is a westfield where the owner has shall we say gone mad and got it down to 350kg.
But at the end of the day it is no good building the lightest bec seven if it dose not handell and verry few of the bec cars manufactured actually
have good handeling.
cheers matt
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 23/8/07 at 09:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by procomp
verry few of the bec cars manufactured actually have good handeling.
Why's that then? I'm sure, from a handling point of view, that the car doesn't know the source of the engine. Or are you suggesting
that cars with heavy engines handle better?
|
|
|
TimC
|
| posted on 24/8/07 at 07:02 AM |
|
|
Col, I think Matt is being more scathing than that and saying that a lot of the manufacturers of BEC kits do not produce a chassis that handles
well.
As usual, Matt doesn't hold back his views!
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 24/8/07 at 08:53 AM |
|
|
Hi that comment may of been a bit harsh.
But having just had a discussion of a certain car manufacturer and just how bad even the basic dimensions of the car where i was a bit wound up.
But next time you are with your cars try measuring the wheel base both sides. It may suprise some of you to see such a big difference.
cheers matt
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
