LS1/FD 2825lbs f49.59%/r50.41% :)
05-22-05, 07:36 PM
#1
LS1/FD 2825lbs f49.59%/r50.41% :)
Corner weighted my car yesterday. '93 Touring with sunroof, rear windshield wiper, R1 spoiler, '99 RZ side skirts, Gram Light 57 Pro 18x9's with 255/35/18 Toyo T-1S's (47lbs) and 18x10 275/35/18 Mich Pilot Sport rears (51lbs). No a/c or p/s, TriPoint adj bar, coilovers, no front bumper support (fiberglass part). Has spare tire, jack, rear carpet, no divider or rear bins.
2825lbs with nearly full tank of gas (maybe 3 gallons shy)
49.59% front l707 r697
50.41% rear l716 r708
A refresher on the combo:
'99 LS1/T56
Hinson: Kmember, torque arm, trans mount, alum driveshaft, tie rods
AFR 205cc heads (66cc chambers) milled .024", MLS gaskets, flycut pistons
Katech rod bolts, March pulley, Thunder Racing tensioner
TSP 233/239 .603/.600" 112LSA cam (sounds healthy), 7.4" hardened pushrod
LS6 intake, ported stock TB
JTR 1 7/8" LT headers, radiator, stock FD fans, 3.5" cold air kit, K&N 3.5" air filter
Magnaflow: 3" cats, Xpipe, mufflers, tips
March underdrive pulley, no a/c or p/s (feels great without p/s actually)
RAM 910 clutch, alum flywheel, 3:90 gears, S4 Turbo 2 LSD, 300M axles (Jodeny)
We also scaled another '94 FD base with cloth seats, no sunroof, dual 2 1/2", no cats, stock rims/tires (40lbs each), LS1/T56 with p/s but no a/c. Full interior.
2771lbs!
51.3% front l703 r720
48.64% rear l674 r674
he had about 3/4 tank or more
Finally we weighed a stock '93 FD auto with stock driveline, wheels, full interior and it was 2909lbs with a full tank of gas!
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696
So what does everything think?
Mark
2825lbs with nearly full tank of gas (maybe 3 gallons shy)
49.59% front l707 r697
50.41% rear l716 r708
A refresher on the combo:
'99 LS1/T56
Hinson: Kmember, torque arm, trans mount, alum driveshaft, tie rods
AFR 205cc heads (66cc chambers) milled .024", MLS gaskets, flycut pistons
Katech rod bolts, March pulley, Thunder Racing tensioner
TSP 233/239 .603/.600" 112LSA cam (sounds healthy), 7.4" hardened pushrod
LS6 intake, ported stock TB
JTR 1 7/8" LT headers, radiator, stock FD fans, 3.5" cold air kit, K&N 3.5" air filter
Magnaflow: 3" cats, Xpipe, mufflers, tips
March underdrive pulley, no a/c or p/s (feels great without p/s actually)
RAM 910 clutch, alum flywheel, 3:90 gears, S4 Turbo 2 LSD, 300M axles (Jodeny)
We also scaled another '94 FD base with cloth seats, no sunroof, dual 2 1/2", no cats, stock rims/tires (40lbs each), LS1/T56 with p/s but no a/c. Full interior.
2771lbs!
51.3% front l703 r720
48.64% rear l674 r674
he had about 3/4 tank or more
Finally we weighed a stock '93 FD auto with stock driveline, wheels, full interior and it was 2909lbs with a full tank of gas!
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696
So what does everything think?
Mark
Last edited by gnx7; 05-22-05 at 07:44 PM.
05-22-05, 08:18 PM
#2
Rotary Freak
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Glyndon MN
Posts: 1,660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds about right I weighed my 88 TII 13BT no P/S, A/C, air pump and etc, still full interior and factory glass and it weighed 2618. I also pulled every little nut and bolt off the car that was no longer holding anything anymore off. I was wondering how much it would weigh with one of the new rotarys like the renisis. Oh well 2800 is a nice weight for a V8 rex though Good Job 
05-22-05, 09:42 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My FD was 48%F and 52%R at 2643 pounds with no ac and ps and full tank of gas. Looks like the LS1 add 170+ more pounds to that.
With 300+ hp, rear weight bias is very important. I'd say 45%F and 55%R is perfect.
With 300+ hp, rear weight bias is very important. I'd say 45%F and 55%R is perfect.
05-22-05, 10:22 PM
#5
Originally Posted by EricM
My FD was 48%F and 52%R at 2643 pounds with no ac and ps and full tank of gas. Looks like the LS1 add 170+ more pounds to that.
With 300+ hp, rear weight bias is very important. I'd say 45%F and 55%R is perfect.
With 300+ hp, rear weight bias is very important. I'd say 45%F and 55%R is perfect.
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696"
05-22-05, 10:24 PM
#6
Mark, how is the low range power with that cam? I was thinking of a cam with lift in the mod 500 range.
I sent my heads for porting and polishing and will be ordering up my cam package soon. I also just ordered one of those electric water pumps in a group buy. My project is under way....
I sent my heads for porting and polishing and will be ordering up my cam package soon. I also just ordered one of those electric water pumps in a group buy. My project is under way....
05-23-05, 03:29 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you missed this part - "Finally we weighed a stock '93 FD auto with stock driveline, wheels, full interior and it was 2909lbs with a full tank of gas!
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696"
Nope, I didn't miss that part. It's obvious he wants to justify the engine swap by removing ac, ps, and presumably the air pump. I was just noting that to compare apples to apples, my car weighs 175 lbs less than his. In addition, at that power level(300+ hp), it is more desirable to have rear weight bias than a 50/50 weight distribution, like I said 45/55 is considered best.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696"
Nope, I didn't miss that part. It's obvious he wants to justify the engine swap by removing ac, ps, and presumably the air pump. I was just noting that to compare apples to apples, my car weighs 175 lbs less than his. In addition, at that power level(300+ hp), it is more desirable to have rear weight bias than a 50/50 weight distribution, like I said 45/55 is considered best.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
Trending Topics
05-23-05, 07:10 PM
#8
"like I said 45/55 is considered best... "
I wouldn't call it defending the LS1 swap... just making people aware the swap doesn't screw up the balance.
The car that weighed 2771lbs has p/s.... just no a/c compressor which is about 15lbs. His a/c lines are intact.
I'd love to read about any FD's that are balanced like this. Are you an engineer?
Ask Howard Coleman on here how is car is balanced who is the suspension/racing guru. I bet his car is closer to 48/52 or 49/51. He mentioned to me he races all over the midWest and East Coast and holds some lap records on many tracks in his class.
We can all be keyboard PHd's.... until you prove it on the track we are all speculating.
I wouldn't call it defending the LS1 swap... just making people aware the swap doesn't screw up the balance.
The car that weighed 2771lbs has p/s.... just no a/c compressor which is about 15lbs. His a/c lines are intact.
I'd love to read about any FD's that are balanced like this. Are you an engineer?
Ask Howard Coleman on here how is car is balanced who is the suspension/racing guru. I bet his car is closer to 48/52 or 49/51. He mentioned to me he races all over the midWest and East Coast and holds some lap records on many tracks in his class.
We can all be keyboard PHd's.... until you prove it on the track we are all speculating.
05-23-05, 07:18 PM
#9
Rotary Freak
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EricM
It's obvious he wants to justify the engine swap by removing ac, ps, and presumably the air pump. I was just noting that to compare apples to apples, my car weighs 175 lbs less than his. In addition, at that power level (300+ hp), it is more desirable to have rear weight bias than a 50/50 weight distribution, like I said 45/55 is considered best.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
actually its funny, youre doing the same thing you accuse him of. at least he was nice enough to provide specifics even the weight of his wheels so you can make a fair comparison ONCE you provide those details for YOUR own car. if you knew the small size and weight of the LS1 P/S pump you wouldnt have even brough that issue up, its minimal, like 5 pounds... trust me. after removing A/C, I also saw that was a minimal weight issue. I agree the LS1T56 adds weight and it could be from 80 to 175 pounds BUT that magic weight number depends on what you compare the LS1 to... a twin turbo setup or a modified single turbo, or a nonturbo FC setup... etc. etc. etc. So, in the end, our LS1rx7's completely romp all over the competition AND for less cost. after experiencing these cars firsthand and in several different states of tune/prep, I dont see the point of YOUR arguments against the minimal weight gain of the LS1 swap. give it up.
Last edited by owen is fat; 05-23-05 at 07:31 PM.
05-23-05, 07:49 PM
#10
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
Originally Posted by owen is fat
So, in the end, our LS1rx7's completely romp all over the competition AND for less cost. after experiencing these cars firsthand and in several different states of tune/prep, I dont see the point of YOUR arguments against the minimal weight gain of the LS1 swap. give it up.
Gnx7, thanks for the info
.
05-23-05, 08:00 PM
#11
Full Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Green Oak,MI
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um, I need to get the video of my car with the open headers and then you'll hear a unique RX7
Mine is an R1 with the PS stuff hanging in the engine bay, and I'm adding air conditioning. I'm sure I'm under 2800 also.
My goal is to be under 2900lbs, but with the additional of a good amount of sound deadening.
Mine is an R1 with the PS stuff hanging in the engine bay, and I'm adding air conditioning. I'm sure I'm under 2800 also.
My goal is to be under 2900lbs, but with the additional of a good amount of sound deadening.
05-23-05, 08:07 PM
#12
Originally Posted by EricM
I think you missed this part - "Finally we weighed a stock '93 FD auto with stock driveline, wheels, full interior and it was 2909lbs with a full tank of gas!
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696"
Nope, I didn't miss that part. It's obvious he wants to justify the engine swap by removing ac, ps, and presumably the air pump. I was just noting that to compare apples to apples, my car weighs 175 lbs less than his. In addition, at that power level(300+ hp), it is more desirable to have rear weight bias than a 50/50 weight distribution, like I said 45/55 is considered best.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
50.67% front l742 r732
49.33% rear l739 r696"
Nope, I didn't miss that part. It's obvious he wants to justify the engine swap by removing ac, ps, and presumably the air pump. I was just noting that to compare apples to apples, my car weighs 175 lbs less than his. In addition, at that power level(300+ hp), it is more desirable to have rear weight bias than a 50/50 weight distribution, like I said 45/55 is considered best.
It's pretty funny how you guys want so much to justify your decision to go LS1 and make you feel better by not having ac and ps.
05-23-05, 08:39 PM
#13
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: fremont, ca
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just took a ride in this beast today, and man is it ever impressive. Tons of power all over the RPM range, sounds awesome, rides well, and even corners astonishingly well. I hope when I get my single tuned it'll be as fast as this. Thanks for the ride Mark.
Neil
Neil
05-23-05, 09:16 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
um, no.
actually its funny, youre doing the same thing you accuse him of. at least he was nice enough to provide specifics even the weight of his wheels so you can make a fair comparison ONCE you provide those details for YOUR own car. if you knew the small size and weight of the LS1 P/S pump you wouldnt have even brough that issue up, its minimal, like 5 pounds... trust me. after removing A/C, I also saw that was a minimal weight issue. I agree the LS1T56 adds weight and it could be from 80 to 175 pounds BUT that magic weight number depends on what you compare the LS1 to... a twin turbo setup or a modified single turbo, or a nonturbo FC setup... etc. etc. etc. So, in the end, our LS1rx7's completely romp all over the competition AND for less cost. after experiencing these cars firsthand and in several different states of tune/prep, I dont see the point of YOUR arguments against the minimal weight gain of the LS1 swap. give it up.
Sure, I'm doing the same thing as he did but that's not the point smartass. The point is he did it to justify what he did while I did it to get fast. That's the point of my post if you missed it.
Sure the ac and ps don't weigh that much but if you notice he's got other stuff as well(aftermarket headers, exhaust, light flywheel). If you want to compare apples to apples, get an FD which has aftermarket downpipe, exhaust, lightweight flywheel, etc. which is exactly how my car is setup. Got it now ?
I wouldn't call it defending the LS1 swap... just making people aware the swap doesn't screw up the balance.
The swap does screw up the balance. Front/rear weights are not the only thing the world, buddy. Equally important is center of gravity which is undoubtedly higher now with the LS1 in place and is one of the reasons why rotary is better than most pistons engine except drysumped and/or flat engines.
I'd love to read about any FD's that are balanced like this. Are you an engineer?
Yes, I am. A non engineer can understand the concept of center of gravity. It's not that hard.
Ask Howard Coleman on here how is car is balanced who is the suspension/racing guru. I bet his car is closer to 48/52 or 49/51. He mentioned to me he races all over the midWest and East Coast and holds some lap records on many tracks in his class.
Why don't you ask him. You mention 48/52, funny that's exactly what my car was in the first place.
We can all be keyboard PHd's.... until you prove it on the track we are all speculating.
Why don't you tell Porsche/Ferrari/McLaren engineers that they're all keyboard PhD ? And while you're at it, laugh at the whole racing community as well as just about all purpose built race cars out there have a slight rear weight bias. Hahahaha.... you crack me up man, look up the weight distribution for these cars, there is a reason why they're more leaning towards rear weight bias at that power level. Again, I have to emphasize that usually at 300+ hp a rearweight bias car is more desirable.
actually its funny, youre doing the same thing you accuse him of. at least he was nice enough to provide specifics even the weight of his wheels so you can make a fair comparison ONCE you provide those details for YOUR own car. if you knew the small size and weight of the LS1 P/S pump you wouldnt have even brough that issue up, its minimal, like 5 pounds... trust me. after removing A/C, I also saw that was a minimal weight issue. I agree the LS1T56 adds weight and it could be from 80 to 175 pounds BUT that magic weight number depends on what you compare the LS1 to... a twin turbo setup or a modified single turbo, or a nonturbo FC setup... etc. etc. etc. So, in the end, our LS1rx7's completely romp all over the competition AND for less cost. after experiencing these cars firsthand and in several different states of tune/prep, I dont see the point of YOUR arguments against the minimal weight gain of the LS1 swap. give it up.
Sure, I'm doing the same thing as he did but that's not the point smartass. The point is he did it to justify what he did while I did it to get fast. That's the point of my post if you missed it.
Sure the ac and ps don't weigh that much but if you notice he's got other stuff as well(aftermarket headers, exhaust, light flywheel). If you want to compare apples to apples, get an FD which has aftermarket downpipe, exhaust, lightweight flywheel, etc. which is exactly how my car is setup. Got it now ?
I wouldn't call it defending the LS1 swap... just making people aware the swap doesn't screw up the balance.
The swap does screw up the balance. Front/rear weights are not the only thing the world, buddy. Equally important is center of gravity which is undoubtedly higher now with the LS1 in place and is one of the reasons why rotary is better than most pistons engine except drysumped and/or flat engines.
I'd love to read about any FD's that are balanced like this. Are you an engineer?
Yes, I am. A non engineer can understand the concept of center of gravity. It's not that hard.
Ask Howard Coleman on here how is car is balanced who is the suspension/racing guru. I bet his car is closer to 48/52 or 49/51. He mentioned to me he races all over the midWest and East Coast and holds some lap records on many tracks in his class.
Why don't you ask him. You mention 48/52, funny that's exactly what my car was in the first place.
We can all be keyboard PHd's.... until you prove it on the track we are all speculating.
Why don't you tell Porsche/Ferrari/McLaren engineers that they're all keyboard PhD ? And while you're at it, laugh at the whole racing community as well as just about all purpose built race cars out there have a slight rear weight bias. Hahahaha.... you crack me up man, look up the weight distribution for these cars, there is a reason why they're more leaning towards rear weight bias at that power level. Again, I have to emphasize that usually at 300+ hp a rearweight bias car is more desirable.
05-24-05, 01:00 AM
#17
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by EricM
The swap does screw up the balance. Front/rear weights are not the only thing the world, buddy. Equally important is center of gravity which is undoubtedly higher now with the LS1 in place and is one of the reasons why rotary is better than most pistons engine except drysumped and/or flat engines.
You're a funny one to preach about balance when you install a Flintstones rear end in your car...break into the 10s yet?
At least you're only claiming 26XX lbs instead of 23XX lbs these days....
05-24-05, 07:43 AM
#19
Lives on the Forum
Originally Posted by gnx7
Corner Gram Light 57 Pro 18x9's with 255/35/18 Toyo T-1S's (47lbs) and 18x10 275/35/18 Mich Pilot Sport rears (51lbs).
So what does everything think?
So what does everything think?
-Ted
05-24-05, 08:58 AM
#20
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeez, why does every weight thread turn into a pissing contest? 
You guys did notice that the subforum was Other Engine Conversions right? No one forced you to come in here.
Several of us now have posted weights, corner weights, pictures of cars on scales, impressions from neutral parties driving the cars, etc.
If you like your rotary...great. A lot of us did. I liked mine right up to the point I pulled it to convert to an LS1. I just wanted something different and a new challenge.
Our point here is that the LS1 is a viable option to power the car that doesn't negatively impact the great handling or perfomance that the car came with. It's not your car, so there's no need to nitpick it and point out all the shortcomings.
You guys did notice that the subforum was Other Engine Conversions right? No one forced you to come in here.Several of us now have posted weights, corner weights, pictures of cars on scales, impressions from neutral parties driving the cars, etc.
If you like your rotary...great. A lot of us did. I liked mine right up to the point I pulled it to convert to an LS1. I just wanted something different and a new challenge.
Our point here is that the LS1 is a viable option to power the car that doesn't negatively impact the great handling or perfomance that the car came with. It's not your car, so there's no need to nitpick it and point out all the shortcomings.
05-24-05, 09:03 AM
#22
Schadenfreude...Ha Ha
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GoodfellaFD3S
Will have to disagree with you there. It's all a matter of personal preference.
Some of us prefer leaving the proper engine in the car
How does one justify the spoogefest you see over a 20b conversion then? It's not the "proper" engine either, but it is a rotary.
Different strokes for different folks is what it boils down to.
05-24-05, 01:56 PM
#24
Z06 powered FD
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EricM
The swap does screw up the balance. Front/rear weights are not the only thing the world, buddy. Equally important is center of gravity which is undoubtedly higher now with the LS1 in place and is one of the reasons why rotary is better than most pistons engine except drysumped and/or flat engines.
05-24-05, 05:03 PM
#25
Had an alignment and recorner weighted today to race specs running 18x10.5" CCW's and 285/30/18 Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires with a full tank of gas.
2800lbs total (no spare/jack/rear carpet/bins/divider)
.4993% front l690 r708
.5007% rear l712 r690
I have a Sparco Rev seat I plan to install which should help a smidgen to reduce weight further and still debating on whether to do a CF hatch/lexan window.
2800lbs total (no spare/jack/rear carpet/bins/divider)
.4993% front l690 r708
.5007% rear l712 r690
I have a Sparco Rev seat I plan to install which should help a smidgen to reduce weight further and still debating on whether to do a CF hatch/lexan window.