The Cal-look Lounge
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email?
November 10, 2024, 22:23:51 pm
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Thank you for your support!
Search:
Advanced search
351169
Posts in
28652
Topics by
6853
Members
Latest Member:
Hacksaw Racing
The Cal-look Lounge
Cal-look/High Performance
Pure racing
The weight saving thread
« previous
next »
Pages:
1
...
21
22
[
23
]
24
25
...
34
Author
Topic: The weight saving thread (Read 577887 times)
Peter Shattock
Sr. Member
Posts: 359
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #660 on:
September 16, 2013, 13:25:09 pm »
I ran the aluminium silencer I made a while back for this year. This was broadly half the weight of the steel one in terms of its construction (I made a copy of the previous muffler I ran in 2010). Needless to say the packing weighed just the same so it was not half the over all weight, but needless to say its about as far back as it can get in the car so a nice place to save weight none the less.
I had hoped to get it black anodized before I ran it so it would look just the same as it did before (don't like the look of it as it is) but I was out of time when it came to it as the final fitting up and welding of brackets was only completed at about 10.00pm of the night before first racing the car.
I've made the new one rebuild able so may take it apart this winter to anodize it and see what state the packing is in.
No signs of cracking and its been through plenty of heat cycles now and has bounced around on the street, but only for about 850 miles so not the ultimate test, but so far so good.
Peter
Logged
The fastest beetle in the village
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #661 on:
September 20, 2013, 04:09:35 am »
Quote from: markvo on September 11, 2013, 07:33:06 am
The drilled rods are still running every day! Mark Voegtly
Hey Mark, do you have more photos of the parts in that engine?
Logged
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #662 on:
September 20, 2013, 20:26:12 pm »
yes lots of pics !
Logged
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #663 on:
September 20, 2013, 20:32:49 pm »
more
Logged
modnrod
Hero Member
Posts: 795
Old School Volksies
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #664 on:
September 20, 2013, 21:00:44 pm »
WOW!!!
That's just cool!
Logged
Zach Gomulka
Hero Member
Posts: 6991
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #665 on:
September 20, 2013, 22:05:36 pm »
Wicked cool!
Logged
Born in the '80s, stuck in the '70s.
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #666 on:
September 21, 2013, 08:00:04 am »
It was a total of 6.5 lbs. weight removal ,over 1 lb just on the rods!
Logged
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #667 on:
September 22, 2013, 01:51:32 am »
Is that a Mg cam gear in that last pic?
Logged
Lee.C
Hero Member
Posts: 6458
I might be an Idiot but I'm not an Arsehole!
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #668 on:
September 22, 2013, 16:57:04 pm »
Seriously cool
Logged
You either "Get It" or you don't......
richie
Hero Member
Posts: 5687
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #669 on:
September 22, 2013, 17:05:18 pm »
Quote from: Bruce on September 22, 2013, 01:51:32 am
Is that a Mg cam gear in that last pic?
36 horse maybe?
Logged
Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!
Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #670 on:
September 22, 2013, 17:18:19 pm »
Yes the cam gear is mag
Logged
DKK Ted
DKK
Hero Member
Posts: 1879
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #671 on:
September 22, 2013, 23:51:43 pm »
Say Mark! Are those the same parts you were lightening up when I was working there? On my Ti rods, can I do the same, or that's not a good idea on them.
Ted
Logged
VW Classic 2012
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #672 on:
September 23, 2013, 02:21:52 am »
Hey Ted, yes those are the same rods.The titanium rods only weigh about 400 grams total! No need drilling the holes, in the steel rods only removed about 17 grams. it would only be half that in titanium.
Logged
Zach Gomulka
Hero Member
Posts: 6991
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #673 on:
September 23, 2013, 04:29:48 am »
What's the specs on that motor?
Logged
Born in the '80s, stuck in the '70s.
markvo
Newbie
Posts: 43
1915cc
«
Reply #674 on:
September 24, 2013, 07:25:29 am »
94mm bore with 1600 short wrist pins with keepers moved in on both sides ,excessive grinding inside bottom of piston and 10cc dish in Cima pistons. The dish follows the underside of the piston so as to keep the same thickness all the way across! 69 mm Berg counterweighted crank with all weight removed opposite the counterweight! VZ 25 cam lightened lifters, drilled and grooved crank gear. One of pulley made with steel hub and aluminum pinned and welded fully balanced with a half a gram as a whole rotating unit. 40 by 37.5 heads by Jeff Denham The rods are 311 b stock rods with hours of grinding and milling and drilling oil grooving etc. You can rev it twice between shifts, very fun ride!
Logged
pupjoint
Hero Member
Posts: 723
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #675 on:
October 02, 2013, 06:47:09 am »
check this out?
http://www.pro-bolt.com/
Logged
modnrod
Hero Member
Posts: 795
Old School Volksies
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #676 on:
November 19, 2013, 03:53:11 am »
This coolest thread fell off the first page !?!?!?! Best I fix that!
I've been lying around for a month after illness, so I've had PLENTY of time to consider options on my little Beetle project (eg, get rid of everything else and start fixing the thing!
), but one of them is weight of wheel tyre combo's. So as part of my pottering around a bit, I thought I'd weigh some different styles up and contribute to one of my favourite threads.
First up, the 16" alloy wheels with 225/50R16 tyres I had intended to go under the beetle at first, mainly to cover the Supra 300mm/285mm Supra vented discs I had planned for the brakes.
They weigh in at 19.3kg each. OUCH!!!
After that I thought that wider 15" steel wheels would be the go, they're strong, tough, and quite often lighter than they look, while still covering the big brakes. I drive a lot of really crappy roads and corrugated gravel, so cheap thin alloy isn't an option.
I weighed the 15x6.5" steel rims with 205/65R15 tyres on the family Holden Commodore sedan and they came in at 18.4kg, a bit better.
Stock VW Golf 5x112 steel 15x6" rims will fit over the big vented brakes I wanted, and when fitted with 195/65R15 tyres come in at 18.1kg.
Still a bit heavy though, these ones here..........
The stock 15x4.5" steelies with 165R15s are pretty light after all, they come in at 15.4kg all up........
To put that in perspective, the back tyre on the bike (I use the term loosely.......) here is a 17X6" with a 190/50R17, and comes in at 15.2kg, so the stockers are actually pretty good.
*CAUTION* - obligatory and totally unnecessary photo of my 4yr old for no good reason!
And finally, the old 5-slot 70s-style alloy wheels that are on the car already. I never really liked these things much, not even in the 70s!
I know they're lighter than they look though, so I thought I'd get one off and throw it on the scales for a quick comparison. If they don't weigh too much (look at all that chunky aluminium around the slots), then I was thinking they might be an option for the drags if I ever decide to see whaat a 1600 "superstocker" will do in a heavy Superbug.
13.6kg each!!!! 14x6" with 195/70R14 radials. WOW!
Maybe I don't need 300mm vented brakes after all. Perhaps I should fit a set of tall 195R14 Redline tyres to the back, keep it up in the air not lowered, and call it done as a "Gasser", HAHA!
Anyway, there you go.
Logged
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #677 on:
November 20, 2013, 02:30:32 am »
Quote from: modnrod on November 19, 2013, 03:53:11 am
the Supra 300mm/285mm Supra vented discs I had planned
This is your problem. Nobody needs discs like that on any Beetle, regardless of use. You're just adding weight. By using smaller solid discs, you will outbrake 99% of the cars on the road.
Logged
modnrod
Hero Member
Posts: 795
Old School Volksies
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #678 on:
November 20, 2013, 06:31:11 am »
Hey Bruce. In general I agree. I was going to use them because that's what I had available to use as an upgrade, even though it would have been massive overkill! I had at first envisaged a bit of club circuits and roundies for the car, now it will only be a highway cruiser only, so "improved" stock should suffice.
Weight-wise, after machining the stock front hub/rotor down to accept the vented hat over the top (18mm thick 300mm vented vs 12mm thick 278mm solid rotor stock), it was a actually a little bit lighter in total including calipers, but still a bit ridiculous!
I'm still surprised about the light 14" alloy combo though, very noticeable.
Logged
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #679 on:
November 21, 2013, 03:12:26 am »
Quote from: modnrod on November 20, 2013, 06:31:11 am
.... vs 12mm thick 278mm solid rotor stock),
What rotor is this? The stock VW rotor is less than 10mm thick.
Post the weights of the components.
Logged
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #680 on:
November 21, 2013, 03:16:54 am »
Quote from: Bruce on January 04, 2012, 07:27:19 am
I have always remembered a story about how Mark Herbert once went into the auto parts store to look at headlights. He opened up all the brands, trying to find ones made from plastic instead of glass. Since hearing that, I too have been searching.
With the H4 bulb in place they weigh in at a flyweight 192g. This compares to 529g for the common Bosch glass H4.
Total savings:
674g
for a pair.
[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]
On the last trip in Mex I found more of these lights. This time they were in their original box:
Weight savings per pair with the adjuster plate = 1.52
kg
Logged
Pas
Hero Member
Posts: 562
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #681 on:
November 21, 2013, 21:04:18 pm »
Quote from: Bruce on November 21, 2013, 03:16:54 am
Quote from: Bruce on January 04, 2012, 07:27:19 am
I have always remembered a story about how Mark Herbert once went into the auto parts store to look at headlights. He opened up all the brands, trying to find ones made from plastic instead of glass. Since hearing that, I too have been searching.
With the H4 bulb in place they weigh in at a flyweight 192g. This compares to 529g for the common Bosch glass H4.
Total savings:
674g
for a pair.
[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]
On the last trip in Mex I found more of these lights. This time they were in their original box:
Weight savings per pair with the adjuster plate = 1.52
kg
Nice score Bruce. Do you have any you want to sell?
Logged
You stay classy, Cal-look Lounge.
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #682 on:
November 22, 2013, 04:38:53 am »
Quote from: Pas on November 21, 2013, 21:04:18 pm
Quote from: Bruce on November 21, 2013, 03:16:54 am
On the last trip in Mex I found more of these lights. This time they were in their original box:
Weight savings per pair with the adjuster plate = 1.52
kg
Nice score Bruce. Do you have any you want to sell?
Unfortunately, since they take up a considerable amount of space, I wasn't able to bring back very many. And those are all gone now.
If there's anyone on here that is really fluent in Espaņol, I think I can find the ph number of the store where I found them in the holy city of Puebla Mexico. Maybe you could do a mail order.
Logged
tikimadness
Hero Member
Posts: 966
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #683 on:
January 08, 2014, 20:38:18 pm »
I'm going to replace the bearing in my rear trailing arms. Did anybody do any modifications to the piece of tubing between the bearings in the arm?Was thinking of swapping them for pieces of aluminum tube.
Michael
Logged
member of team YAC ; the guys who write history.
GASSER GARAGE a few friends creating history.
NIDGAFWYT
NoBars
Full Member
Posts: 214
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #684 on:
January 09, 2014, 06:02:23 am »
Carbon door cards and rear seat delete.
Logged
My real name is Anthony Consorte.
Bruce
Hero Member
Posts: 1418
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #685 on:
January 10, 2014, 04:57:03 am »
Quote from: tikimadness on January 08, 2014, 20:38:18 pm
Did anybody do any modifications to the piece of tubing between the bearings in the arm? Was thinking of swapping them for pieces of aluminum tube.
I wouldn't use Al. The stock spacer is hardened steel, and I've seen them beat up sometimes. The compressive stress is considerable. How about drilling holes cross ways through them?
Logged
NoBars
Full Member
Posts: 214
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #686 on:
January 13, 2014, 01:40:04 am »
Carbon rear seat delete.
Logged
My real name is Anthony Consorte.
modnrod
Hero Member
Posts: 795
Old School Volksies
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #687 on:
April 01, 2014, 09:35:19 am »
Old stocker (a few grams of crap as you can see)......
New and shiny.......
Old retainers/collets.......
New and shiny......
Old total weight.......
New and shiny.......
Mmmmm, shiny!
Logged
Erlend / bug66
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 958
SCC Event
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #688 on:
April 01, 2014, 09:58:47 am »
Went for a new engine set-up this year.
Away with 69mm crank, in with a 76mm. No significant weight difference.
Mahle A-pistons to Wisecos: 82gram per piston!
Logged
The '67:
10.626 @ 132mph, SCC 2016
10.407 @ 134mph, SCC 2017
10.221 @ 135mph, SCC 2018
The '59:
Not yet..
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
Posts: 3214
12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008
Re: The weight saving thread
«
Reply #689 on:
April 01, 2014, 11:31:01 am »
Quote from: Erlend / bug66 on April 01, 2014, 09:58:47 am
Went for a new engine set-up this year.
Away with 69mm crank, in with a 76mm. No significant weight difference.
Mahle A-pistons to Wisecos: 82gram per piston!
No significant static weight increase, but the weight is further away from the center line.
Logged
Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
Pages:
1
...
21
22
[
23
]
24
25
...
34
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Cal-look/High Performance
-----------------------------
=> Cal-look
=> Pure racing
=> Technical stuff
=> Top Racers lists
=> In Da Werks
-----------------------------
The Cal-look classifieds
-----------------------------
=> For sale!
=> Wanted
-----------------------------
Happenings
-----------------------------
=> Happenings
=> Scandinavian Cal-look Classic (the event)
-----------------------------
Tyre kicking
-----------------------------
=> Off Topic
Loading...