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).

 

Nice.

 

I weighted mine at 2700lbs with the same mods as you, but with a 1/4 tank.

 

Fuel weighs about 8 Llbs per gallon.

 

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

 

Correct. I jumped the gun. Fuel weighs about 6.25 Llbs per gallon. Thanks.

 

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..

 

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!

 

i wouldnt really trust those truck scales 100%, even though it did have a certified CAT drive on scale

 

MikeC is right, althought I only know lbs, miles, ounces etc. I can totally understand how much better and easier the metric sytem is.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

Y2K was a tough change in manufacturing practices, but we made it happen..but who wants to go through that again

 

I can't even get an accurate bodyweight measure even at over 200lbs the scale at my gym and school differ 10lbs wtf?

 

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.

 

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.