LS1/FD pulls 1.13g's on skidpad.......
06-07-05, 05:48 PM
#16
Super Snuggles
Originally Posted by turbojeff
I thought you were self confident not to worry about what I say, behind your back or in front of it.
06-07-05, 07:26 PM
#20
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dover, DE
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gnx7
Those tires are all around on the car. No front fender liners so they don't rub. Front fenders had the lips cut vs. rolled. Wonder what it would do on shaved rubber? 
-2* up front with 6* caster, zero toe
-1.3* out back with a little bit more than 1/16 combined toe
Issue showing the competitors comes out in Sept/Oct. and the issue with the challenge is slated for November.
I'll post some pics tonight.
-2* up front with 6* caster, zero toe
-1.3* out back with a little bit more than 1/16 combined toe
Issue showing the competitors comes out in Sept/Oct. and the issue with the challenge is slated for November.
I'll post some pics tonight.
06-07-05, 07:47 PM
#21
06-07-05, 08:41 PM
#23
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Edwards, CA
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wankel7
How would these numbers be different if it still had a Wankel.
0.00 g -the motor would have popped long before the skidpad portion of the challenge.
06-07-05, 09:55 PM
#24
moon ******
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last I checked the ls1 and the 13brew with all the turbo **** on it weigh about the same.
Plus, with the F/R weight distribution being slightly TAIL heavy with the LS1... um... the same?
Plus, with the F/R weight distribution being slightly TAIL heavy with the LS1... um... the same?
06-08-05, 12:09 AM
#26
some pics of the car...... it was only running for 3 weeks before the contest and still needs tons of work and fixing issues. I bought the car with a cut chassis harness, gutted interior, blown motor, clean title and brought it back from the dead.
http://www.torquecentral.com/showthr...light=progress
http://www.torquecentral.com/showthr...light=progress
Last edited by gnx7; 06-08-05 at 12:15 AM.
06-08-05, 09:38 AM
#28
Congrats!
I think handling is just a matter of a good choice of suspension and tires on a good chassis with a good suspension geometry, weight distribution and low center of mass and polar moment of inertia.
A stock R1/R2 FD with stock tires and suspension measured 0.95 to 0.99 avg g's depending on where you read it. Just put the same huge tires on it and it'll go over 1g.
If you manage to keep near the same weight, weight distribution and polar moment then the choice of powerplant doesn't matter.
This is a testament of the great chassis and suspension design of the FD
I think handling is just a matter of a good choice of suspension and tires on a good chassis with a good suspension geometry, weight distribution and low center of mass and polar moment of inertia.
A stock R1/R2 FD with stock tires and suspension measured 0.95 to 0.99 avg g's depending on where you read it. Just put the same huge tires on it and it'll go over 1g.
If you manage to keep near the same weight, weight distribution and polar moment then the choice of powerplant doesn't matter.
This is a testament of the great chassis and suspension design of the FD
06-08-05, 10:34 AM
#30
Resident Retard
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Cockaigne
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jimlab
What's left to discuss? 
now back on track:
did you have to cut the fenders? I have heard that the CCWs 18x10 will fit fine with no modifications and a 7.5 offset.
*edit: ok I see you're running 10.5, but with the same 285/30 tires, so I'm still interested in an answer. I was thinking of going CCW 18x10 all the way around.
Last edited by weaklink; 06-08-05 at 10:37 AM.