3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

Weighed my FD today!

Old 04-13-04, 06:33 PM
  #1  
STi Boxer power!

Thread Starter
 
Scrapiron7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Weighed my FD today!

There's a truck stop in town that has a certified CAT drive on scale, so I figured I would check it out. They only charge $8 to weigh, so I figured why not. I have always been curious. Now I have a state certified certificate with my vehicle weight

Anyways, gross weight was 2760 lbs. That was with a full tank of gas and the spare in the hatch. I don't know how much the spare or the gas weigh, but I figure I will spend $8 in a few more weeks when I am about out of gas and take out the spare for another weigh session.

Weight mods would be a DP, midpipe, catback, no airpump and 17x9 rims (17.2 lbs each).

Last edited by Scrapiron7; 04-13-04 at 06:41 PM.
Old 04-13-04, 06:40 PM
  #2  
shoo shoo retarded flu!

 
zmarko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nice.
Old 04-13-04, 06:44 PM
  #3  
Need a 20b FD.

iTrader: (16)
 
RX7WEEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Bellingham Wa
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I weighted mine at 2700lbs with the same mods as you, but with a 1/4 tank.
Old 04-13-04, 06:47 PM
  #4  
il Cosa Nostra e vivo!!

iTrader: (1)
 
areXseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dove le cose sono fatte il vecchio moda il senso
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fuel weighs about 8 Llbs per gallon.
Old 04-13-04, 06:48 PM
  #5  
Do it right, do it once

iTrader: (30)
 
turbojeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Eugene, OR, usa
Posts: 4,830
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally posted by areXseven
Fuel weighs about 8 Llbs per gallon.
Water weighs 8lb/gal, gas weighs about 6lb/gal but who's counting.
Old 04-13-04, 06:54 PM
  #6  
STi Boxer power!

Thread Starter
 
Scrapiron7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by turbojeff
Water weighs 8lb/gal, gas weighs about 6lb/gal but who's counting.
6lbs per gallon of fuel eh? 20 gallon tank right, according to the factory owners manual? if I weigh with a 1/4 tank next time that's -90 lbs (15x6) plus spare tire weight (no idea what that is).. hmm. Should be well into the 2600s in that case
Old 04-13-04, 07:01 PM
  #7  
il Cosa Nostra e vivo!!

iTrader: (1)
 
areXseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dove le cose sono fatte il vecchio moda il senso
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by turbojeff
Water weighs 8lb/gal, gas weighs about 6lb/gal but who's counting.
Correct. I jumped the gun. Fuel weighs about 6.25 Llbs per gallon. Thanks.
Old 04-13-04, 08:52 PM
  #8  
Import Connoisseur

 
tt2323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: All over the place
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I gotta find a local one.. bricke did your wheel/rim tire turn out lighter then stock?I have no a/c, p/s, airpump, dp, Greddy Ti exhaust, 14lb battery figuring a tad over 2600 with using 2830 as a starting figure..
Old 04-13-04, 10:26 PM
  #9  
Senior Member

 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 305
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You 'mericans really need to get into the 21st century and start using metric. I don't know how you guys even think in these units
Old 04-13-04, 10:29 PM
  #10  
il Cosa Nostra e vivo!!

iTrader: (1)
 
areXseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dove le cose sono fatte il vecchio moda il senso
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by MikeC
You 'mericans really need to get into the 21st century and start using metric. I don't know how you guys even think in these units
We'll get there,...an inch at a time!
Old 04-13-04, 10:44 PM
  #11  
I'm a CF and poop smith

 
skunks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 3,958
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
i wouldnt really trust those truck scales 100%, even though it did have a certified CAT drive on scale
Old 04-13-04, 11:48 PM
  #12  
Senior Member

 
EKTwin93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
MikeC is right, althought I only know lbs, miles, ounces etc. I can totally understand how much better and easier the metric sytem is.
Old 04-14-04, 12:00 AM
  #13  
Senior Member

iTrader: (4)
 
r1dreamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
yeah i brought my car to the weigh station, got it done for free...after hours....2620 with full interior gas and spare. so no weight reduction execpt the mods. me in it 2760 its a base model.
Old 04-14-04, 04:28 AM
  #14  
DETH TRP

iTrader: (7)
 
4CN Air's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Manhattan Beach, CA
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by EKTwin93
MikeC is right, althought I only know lbs, miles, ounces etc. I can totally understand how much better and easier the metric sytem is.
Agreed, if only us stubborn Americans would start teaching the metric systems, things would be much simpler.
Old 04-14-04, 06:33 AM
  #15  
Senior Member

 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 305
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by 4CN Air
Agreed, if only us stubborn Americans would start teaching the metric systems, things would be much simpler.
I think America stuck with the imperial system because of the huge cost of converting as they were more developed in manufacturing than a lot of other countries at the time. It would probably have been better to convert slowly but that might have produced a whole lot of new problems with some manufacturers working on imperial and some metric.
Old 04-14-04, 07:47 AM
  #16  
Olympic Muff Diver

 
blueskaterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
although the metric system is much easier to convert and everything. i think it is much easier to visualize inches and feet than metric. cm is so small and meters are so huge. conversion is just a bitch.
Old 04-14-04, 10:21 AM
  #17  
Don't worry be happy...

iTrader: (1)
 
Montego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 6,845
Received 786 Likes on 462 Posts
Originally posted by blueskaterboy
although the metric system is much easier to convert and everything. i think it is much easier to visualize inches and feet than metric. cm is so small and meters are so huge. conversion is just a bitch.
That is only because you are not used to using the Metric System.
Old 04-14-04, 11:19 AM
  #18  
OFENSIV

iTrader: (6)
 
SpoolinRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by MikeC
You 'mericans really need to get into the 21st century and start using metric. I don't know how you guys even think in these units
Its easy because thats what we all grew up with. It would be like writing with your right hand for years then being forced to switch to write with your left. There was a statment made my the U.S. Gov. that they were gonna start converting everything to metric in 1997. I herd the statement when i was in 5th grade. Now i am a freshmen in college. I dunno why it never happend.
Old 04-14-04, 12:19 PM
  #19  
Olympic Muff Diver

 
blueskaterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well a foot is a bit longer than the length of your foot and an inch is like a segment of your finger. what about meter or cm? i am about 180cm tall. if someone is 1 cm taller thats not even noticeable. if someone is 1 inch taller thats pretty easy to spot but isnt tooo big of a difference.
Old 04-14-04, 01:05 PM
  #20  
DETH TRP

iTrader: (7)
 
4CN Air's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Manhattan Beach, CA
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by blueskaterboy
well a foot is a bit longer than the length of your foot and an inch is like a segment of your finger. what about meter or cm? i am about 180cm tall. if someone is 1 cm taller thats not even noticeable. if someone is 1 inch taller thats pretty easy to spot but isnt tooo big of a difference.
You can't convince people that the standard system is better by giving examples that fit your case. What about when measuring small items. An inch is as small as we go. And how about something that affects the majority of us here...working on cars; wouldn't it be a lot easier if everything were metric?

Metric is hands down, undisputed winner in this showdown. The only reason our archaic system is still in existence is because of Americans' fear of change.


...but anyway, it's getting a little off topic
Old 04-14-04, 01:11 PM
  #21  
bow leggin'

iTrader: (25)
 
Scrub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Delaware
Posts: 6,060
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
I hate the standard system......11/16ths 1/4 inch 3/8 STFU!!! All I need is 14mm, 12mm, 10mm, 19mm...you get the idea. For using tools it's a lot easier
Old 04-14-04, 01:20 PM
  #22  
DETH TRP

iTrader: (7)
 
4CN Air's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Manhattan Beach, CA
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by MikeC
I think America stuck with the imperial system because of the huge cost of converting as they were more developed in manufacturing than a lot of other countries at the time. It would probably have been better to convert slowly but that might have produced a whole lot of new problems with some manufacturers working on imperial and some metric.
Y2K was a tough change in manufacturing practices, but we made it happen..but who wants to go through that again
Old 04-14-04, 02:02 PM
  #23  
Import Connoisseur

 
tt2323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: All over the place
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I can't even get an accurate bodyweight measure even at over 200lbs the scale at my gym and school differ 10lbs wtf?
Old 04-14-04, 02:58 PM
  #24  
Olympic Muff Diver

 
blueskaterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
yeah we have ridiculous things like quarter inch for tiny things... but i do agree it would be easier to use metric. but the english system came about for/from practical use and thats why its easier to understand:

"The cubit of Noah's time was the length of a man's forearm or the distance from the tip of the elbow to the end of his middle finger. Many times this was useful, because it was readily available, convenient, and couldn't be mislaid. However, it was not a positive fixed dimension or a standard.

While the cubit is no longer used as a unit of measurement, there are many customary standards that originated in about the same way. Our foot-rule started out as the length of a man's foot. So, in the early days of history, the foot varied in length, sometimes as much as 3 or 4 inches. Once the ancients started using arms and feet for measuring distance, it was only natural that they also thought of using fingers, hands and legs. They also may have discovered that some surprising ratios existed in body measurements. What is now called an inch originally was the width of a man's thumb. It also was the length of the forefinger from the tip to the first joint. Twelve times that distance made a foot. Three times the length of the foot was the distance from the tip of a man's nose to the end of his outstretched arm. This distance very closely approximates what is called the yard. Two yards equaled a fathom which, thousands of years ago, was the distance across a man's outstretched arms. Half a yard was the 18-inch cubit, and half a cubit was called a span, which was the distance across the hand from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the little finger when the fingers were spread out as far as possible. A hand was half a span."

more here:
http://www.cftech.com/BrainBank/OTHE...icHistory.html

metric is much more practical especially in engineering, etc. but you cannot deny the standard system is VERY easy to visualize and understand, just the conversion is very bad because there is no set "base".

sorry for off topic.
Old 04-14-04, 04:45 PM
  #25  
Senior Member

 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 305
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by blueskaterboy
well a foot is a bit longer than the length of your foot and an inch is like a segment of your finger. what about meter or cm? i am about 180cm tall. if someone is 1 cm taller thats not even noticeable. if someone is 1 inch taller thats pretty easy to spot but isnt tooo big of a difference.
I agree that an inch and foot is probably a better size for a measurement but then you need to work with numbers like 1 1/4 inch instead of 31.75mm. It's very easy to then go to 3.175 cm or 0.03175 metres etc. If your some sort of scientist or engineer you can go down to nano metres etc.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Weighed my FD today!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:56 PM.