Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

View Poll Results: What do you consider to be the ideal front/rear weight distribution?
65% Front, 35% Rear 3 3.23%
60% Front, 40% Rear 11 11.83%
55% Front, 45% Rear 16 17.20%
50% Front, 50% Rear 37 39.78%
45% Front, 55% Rear 19 20.43%
40% Front, 60% Rear 7 7.53%
35% Front, 65% Rear 0 0%
Voters: 93. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 16-07-2008, 11:59 AM   #31
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
Carroll Smith is another that favours a lot more weight on the rear. He mentions 35/65 to 40/65 in at least one of his many books.
40/65 might be a bit difficult.......!!



- | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
This user likes this post:
Old 16-07-2008, 01:17 PM   #32
Gammaboy
Grinder+Welder = Race car
 
Gammaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Briz-Vegas
Posts: 3,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
40/65 might be a bit difficult.......!!
Chaparral 2J "Sucker car" - Static downforce!
__________________
"No, it will never have enough power until I can spin the wheels at the end of the straightaway in high gear"
- Too much power is never enough....Mark Donohue on the Can Am Porsche 917.
Gammaboy is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-07-2008, 05:51 PM   #33
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,692
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
40/65 might be a bit difficult.......!!
Good to see someone is on the ball. Try 40/60.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 16-07-2008, 06:09 PM   #34
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,692
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gammaboy
Chaparral 2J "Sucker car" - Static downforce!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XFjB...-8&sa=N&tab=iv
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 17-07-2008, 05:43 PM   #35
CAT600
Making your Ford Better
Donating Member3
 
CAT600's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bluestreak Performance
Posts: 11,503
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: Always willing to help out fellow AFF members... Technical Contributor: For members who share their technical expertise. - Issue reason: Daniels knowledge of modular engines and superchargers is extremely valuable to the AFF community. I have learnt quite a bit just reading his build threads. His contributions are often utilised by other members. 
Default

Interesting point,

My TS50 was weighed yesterday. Front/rear was 56/44.

Compare this to the 54/46 with the Windsor engine in it.

I will attempt to get a manual B-series GT weighted for comparison.

Daniel
__________________


BLUESTREAK PERFORMANCE

New products HERE

"PSI Miami" BLUESTREAK compound turbo system development mule
CAT600 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-07-2008, 10:20 AM   #36
Ghiadude
FORMERLY TX3DUDE
 
Ghiadude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: "THE GONG"
Posts: 2,488
Default

VE commodores are quoted as 50/50. I think a little either way wont matter - im surprised the ts50 is that close!!! wow!!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by AL NZ
it wouldn't matter what FPV or FordOz call it, because it will be - The One.
Ghiadude is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-07-2008, 11:11 AM   #37
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,692
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tx3dude
VE commodores are quoted as 50/50. I think a little either way wont matter - im surprised the ts50 is that close!!! wow!!
That close to what?
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-07-2008, 02:14 PM   #38
Rev28K
re
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Victoria - where being slow & incompetent is considered being "safe"
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
That close to what?
Close to the VE?

Were the quoted figures were an even playing field? Say both with a driver and no passengers and half a tank of fuel?

Lightish Windsor (alloy heads, light block compared to an earlier version) and a heavy IRS (compared to a live rear end) would help the TS50.

I can remember a video showing corner weighting for a Japanese spec Honda apparently they allowed for the weight of a typical 60kg Japanese driver (wonder if Ford/Tickford/FPV allow for a typical 100kg Auusie driver)
__________________
Scuderia Rev: Otto the tow pig - 2007 3.0 litre Coupé, vernünftig schnelle aber kein peilstab, Bathurst 2007 und 2010 zwölf Stunde Gewinner Jaffa the angry ant - mid 70's Honda 市民の, 73 と立方インチ LSD Elle "the body" shell - early 70's Datsun フェアレディ coupe. いい体は彼女の内側、内側と土台を待つ
Rev28K is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-07-2008, 02:44 PM   #39
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,692
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev28K
Close to the VE?
That would still be around 100kg extra over the the front axles, which is a lot of weight.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-07-2008, 10:20 PM   #40
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,692
Default

It looks like 50/50 is the most popular choice, although a hefty 70% of people believe that the ideal static weight distribution is with a minimum of 50% of the weight on the front wheels. A paltry 8% have chosen 40/60 and nobody has chosen 35/65.

It is now time to dispel some myths. 50/50 is not ideal and it is now accepted practice to place the majority of the vehicles weight (60-65%) on the rear wheels. The reasons for this include:

The more weight on the rear wheels, the greater the traction capacity of the rear wheels. Even the difference between 56/44 and 50/50 can be worth around 1/3 of a second over the 1/4 mile for cars with power and weights in the Falcon/Commodore range.

By placing more weight on the rear wheels, the rear wheels can do more braking and thus the braking is more evenly shared between the front and rear wheels. Remember that whilst braking load is transferred from the rear tyres to the front tyres by longitudinal weight transfer.

Reduced weight on the front tyres reduces the amount of power wasted to front tyre scrub whilst cornering.

When steady state cornering 50/50 should provide the highest cornering forces, but this is only if the front and rear tyres have the same width. If the rear tyres are wider, you would need more weight on the rear tyres. Even so steady state cornering is usually only a small percent of the time spent cornering as most cornering is transitional. When a car with 50/50 weight distribution enters a corner it is slowing down and weight is being transferred from the rear to the front, which will cause it to understeer. When a car with a 50/50 weight distribution is accelerating out of the corner it won't be able to generate as much traction compared to a car with more weight on the rear tyres.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-07-2008, 10:06 AM   #41
ohzone
Dent Removal
 
ohzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 32°09′40″S 116°01′12″E WA
Posts: 388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbgs351
It looks like 50/50 is the most popular choice, although a hefty 70% of people believe that the ideal static weight distribution is with a minimum of 50% of the weight on the front wheels. A paltry 8% have chosen 40/60 and nobody has chosen 35/65.

It is now time to dispel some myths. 50/50 is not ideal and it is now accepted practice to place the majority of the vehicles weight (60-65%) on the rear wheels. The reasons for this include:

The more weight on the rear wheels, the greater the traction capacity of the rear wheels. Even the difference between 56/44 and 50/50 can be worth around 1/3 of a second over the 1/4 mile for cars with power and weights in the Falcon/Commodore range.

By placing more weight on the rear wheels, the rear wheels can do more braking and thus the braking is more evenly shared between the front and rear wheels. Remember that whilst braking load is transferred from the rear tyres to the front tyres by longitudinal weight transfer.

Reduced weight on the front tyres reduces the amount of power wasted to front tyre scrub whilst cornering.

When steady state cornering 50/50 should provide the highest cornering forces, but this is only if the front and rear tyres have the same width. If the rear tyres are wider, you would need more weight on the rear tyres. Even so steady state cornering is usually only a small percent of the time spent cornering as most cornering is transitional. When a car with 50/50 weight distribution enters a corner it is slowing down and weight is being transferred from the rear to the front, which will cause it to understeer. When a car with a 50/50 weight distribution is accelerating out of the corner it won't be able to generate as much traction compared to a car with more weight on the rear tyres.
I guess it boils down to what a person is really expecting or wanting from a car, is it drag racing, circuit racing, just A to B, fast with good feel or a bit of everything, there probably is no definitive answer to cover them all.
For me it is fast with good feel so closer to 50/50 is better for me, others will be in a different range
ohzone is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 09-11-2019, 05:25 PM   #42
69ftruck
Starter Motor
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Tas
Posts: 4
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Has anyone weighed a EB XR8 or EB GT to check weight distribution ?????
69ftruck is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 10:00 AM   #43
jpd80
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
jpd80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,141
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: Thoughtful contributions to our community 
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

New Mid-Engine Corvette weight distribution is now 40% Front, 60% Rear
and is much faster through corners than the old front engines car.

Mid engined cars are impractical as sedans but I think the new Electric vehicles
with skateboard chassis placing batteries under the floorpan will prove to be
light years in front of current ICE vehicles for handling and performance,
they can effectively put 60% weight over the rear wheels and still have RWD
and good regen braking.

Last edited by jpd80; 10-11-2019 at 10:07 AM.
jpd80 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 10:04 AM   #44
jpd80
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
jpd80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,141
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: Thoughtful contributions to our community 
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69ftruck View Post
Has anyone weighed a EB XR8 or EB GT to check weight distribution ?????
My EB V8 Fairmont worked out to be pretty close to 56/44 which is pretty normal
for X and E series Falcons.
jpd80 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 12:29 PM   #45
69ftruck
Starter Motor
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Tas
Posts: 4
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Thanks for that , do you know what the actual weights on the front and rear axle are ?
69ftruck is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 12:37 PM   #46
jpd80
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
jpd80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,141
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: Thoughtful contributions to our community 
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69ftruck View Post
Thanks for that , do you know what the actual weights on the front and rear axle are ?
Sorry, no it was years ago before I got my latest one
jpd80 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 02:58 PM   #47
69ftruck
Starter Motor
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Tas
Posts: 4
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

All good, if anyone knows how much weight is on the front axle of EA thru to ED V8 falcon would be greatly appreciated .
69ftruck is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 10-11-2019, 06:07 PM   #48
GasoLane
Moderator
Donating Member2
 
GasoLane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sunny Downtown Wagga Wagga. NSW.
Posts: 35,538
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by jpd80 View Post
Sorry, no it was years ago before I got my latest one
Almost as old as this thread eh?
__________________
Dying at your job is natures way of saying that you're in the wrong line of work.
GasoLane is online now   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
This user likes this post:
Old 10-11-2019, 07:29 PM   #49
hayseed
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 368
Default Re: Front/Rear Weight Distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69ftruck View Post
All good, if anyone knows how much weight is on the front axle of EA thru to ED V8 falcon would be greatly appreciated .
Be easier to go to your nearest Weighbridge (Transport Depot or Scrappy) I would Think..
__________________
"Be who you are and say what you feel...
Because those that matter...........don't mind...
And those that mind............don't matter." -
hayseed is online now   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 04:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL