rtbiscuit

i was going to email him correcting all the errors in his ad, but i can't log on to ebay at work. the BHP was going to be my first correction, followed by the clutch statement, and then asking him about his optimistic pricing of parts.

nope the wider tyre at the rear requires a smaller profile in order to keep the rolling radius as close to original as possible. it helps keep it stretched to the wheel, a larger profile would end up with a more rounded tyre in cross section and there for increase the rolling radius.

2nd tyre package seems good

i've always had fun in the snow with RWD cars done several winters and never any issues and always fun. although i know husky does go way tup norf where snow is usually a no brainer. and deep.

exactly, 2 lots of insurance, 2 lots of tax, 2 lots mot's, 2 lots of fuel, 2 lots air fresheners. you get the idea

enkei rpf1 , front 18 8.5 weigh 18.3lbs rear 18 9.5 weigh 18.6lbs front 19 x 9 weigh 20.3lbs rear 19 x 10 weigh 21.3lbs just been on their website http://www.enkei.com/size_chart/RPF1.pdf weights do alter slightly depending on offset

ian corrected me on this i think, the rpf1's aren't forged but use a special technique keep the weight down. they are one of the lightest wheels going, and extremely affordable when compared to volks. i was going for a set but i now have something special coming for my car. a thread with wheel details on does sound good, and could be stickered on to the wheel section so any time people ask we can point them to it. the konigs are nice, but i think they are meant to be quite heavy; they aren't really a light weight wheel from what i've heard, so will be interested to see what yours weigh attak, as i've never seen the figures.

fair doo's fully understand; but for me i like my drive to work and am lucky enough i suppose to have a job where there are very few issues for the car.

rays are good, but i think things like the enkei rpf1's are even lighter. tyres account for just over half the weight of a wheel. its still probably easier to just find lighter wheels. for most though unless they track it on a regular basis they won't spot the differnece, unless they go for stupidly heavy wheels.

i have driven my wifes car all of twice since she bought it this year, and i wouldn't really call it a shed. i still use my car for everything. if i need more space i've used my boot rack. its having a good car as a daily driver that makes it fun; i enjoy my 10 minute drive to work even in traffic. its nice to go home in something good. and as for people thinking you must have something decent at home cos you wear a nice suit if i see a crap heap car, i see a crap heap car, i tried having a normal car and it lasted 9 months before i was bored sh1tl£ss. its a car, it will wear and age, it will get dinks and curb rashes. yes its good to look after it, but why give up the nice car for work and travel in a crap heap. most of my driving is my commute to work. if you want something fun to drive at the weekends, you might as well get a caterham costs less to buy, run and insure and is probalby more fun to drive. yes i understand people need to move big items, and yes my wife has a big car which we use for that, and for that i am lucky. but if thats your only issue, then thats what mates are for.

chris i think you need some rim protectors, speak to husky, he just fitted some and is very happy. as for the shed thing, i buy a car to drive, whats the point of having a nice car and then leaving it at home. mines my daily driver come rain or shine. yes its annoying to see a dent, but at the end of the day; and i hate to say this, it is just a car after all. at the end of the day its other peoples money and they can spend it how they wish.

but thats what i mean; what you take away in tyre weight you add back in wheel weight. (if you keep the rolling radius the same) true running silly skinny tyres on fat rims, and not sticking to the original rolling resisitance may reduce weight but the car would be poo. and look poo.

great for tracking why keep the radius the same? if your rolling radius is way out, so your speedo will be as well. you'll be travelling a further distance per revolution compared to what the speedo will be reading. or it works in reverse if you go smaller.

best to put nitrogen in your tyres. wont make them lighter, but they won't be as reactive to heat. and so the pressures won't change as the heat does.

you have to keep the rolling radius the same, so to run lower profile you have to fit bigger wheels. what is taken away with one hand; is given back with the other hand.

tyres are heavy beasts and often weigh more than the alloy (depending on wheel size and manufacturer of the wheel)

i'm guessing in the weight of the wheel andlind is addin gthe air as well. from another site i got this list of wheel and tyre weights, Tyre weights of AD08s from here http://www.yokohamatire.com/tires/spec. ... OVA%20AD08 Tyres Fronts 16" 21lb 17" 22lb Rears 16" 22.9lb 17" 25.5lb Wheels Front 16" Cast 17.5lb 16" BBS 13.3lb 17" '04 17.6lb Rear 16" Cast 18.6lb 16" BBS 14.3lb 17" '04 20.5lb Total Front 16" Cast 38.5lb (17.5kg) 16" BBS 34.3lb (15.6kg) 17" '04 39.6lb (18.0kg) Rear 16" Cast 41.5lb (18.8kg) 16" BBS 37.2lb (16.9kg) 17" '04 46.0lb (20.9kg) someone elses research, but goes to show how much the tyres weigh

i think one of the last clips of a car skidding sideways in to the back of a lorry was an S2000 the bloke was thrown clean from his car; i odn't think he was wearing his seat belt.

yeah no worries, i'm guessing it was a keying error; thats the problem with homer simpson hands very true gyroscopic effect plays a big part like rotational mass, almost more so than unsprung and sprung weight Unsprung weight is one thing, rotational mass is quite another. Reducing rotational mass is the key one here because not only do you have to drag the mass of the component upto the speed of the car (as in it is part of the car), but you also have to spin it up to its rotational speed. Hence you have to perform two sets of acceleration on it! Of course, what we actually need to know is the angular momentum. This will give you the energy used to spin up the component. the higher your angular momentum, the more your gyroscopic effect. Hence, the faster your heavy large diameter wheels spin, the more resistance they have to having their direction altered. This can cause allsorts of issues with handling. The Powerball works on gyroscopic forces and if you have ever had a go, you know how difficult it can be to manipulate when spinning. If your an IT techie, pick up a hard drive when it's on, gently move it about and you can feel the gyro resisting/magnifying your movements (I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR DATA LOSS IF YOU DO THIS AND DROP THE DRIVE smile.gif ) In addition, the engine, clutch, flywheel spinning will cause a yawing effect. Granted, not mega, but it's present and it's something to be minimised (can be quite a serious problem on motorbikes, not to mention Helicopters and radial engined aircraft!). So when people go on about 19" wheels wrecking the handling, you now know why one of the heaviest parts of the wheel is actually the tyre, i'm sure those of you who have light weight wheels will tell you, you could probably pick one alloy up with 1 finger, but add a tyre and its a whole different matter.

if it was that it bad you should have been doing 40-50 mph

i'm impressed that a typhoon filter and a nismo exhaust make an extra 48 BHP and all that with out a remap. that car is a rolling miracle. next thing is it will float on water, fly and cure lepers.

my guess is that if it was to be an accurate test then they must have run the same tyres on both wheels i.e. brand and model of tyre. without the original article i don't know. yep less weight to move so the car lights them up easier there are lighter wheels than the rays out there. all have an effect and change the characterisitcs. i think it was a fast ford issue from this month. must admit i'm not a fan of 0-60 drag racing, wheres the fun in going fast in a straight line, any moron can do that. going fast round a corner now thats a whole different ball game.

icame across this else where, its an extract from a recent fast ford magazine that had some interesting information and tests done on light weight wheels. Anyway, I thought a few of you may be interested in this... They have a very good test in this month's edition. They have a tuned Fiesta ST that is running 215bhp. They changed the standard ST wheels for Team Dynamic Pro Race 1.2s which are altogether 12kg lighter. They mention that 12kg unsprung weight is equivalent to around 48kg weight saving from the chassis. They undertook 4 tests - Test 1 - Braking. 60-0mph and 100-0mph Test 2 - Handing. A timed lap around a circuit Test 3 - Standing start acceleration to 60mph Test 4 - In gear acceleration. 30-80mph Results - All tests were performed 3 or 4 times and the times were then averaged. Results were gained using a Racelogic Performance Box. Test 1 - Before 60-0 = 3.2s Before 100-0 = 5.3s G = 0.97 After 60-0 = 3.0s After 100-0 = 4.8s G = 1.07 Test 2 - Before = 1:28.6 After 1:24.3 Test 3 - Before 0-60 = 6.9s Before 0-100 = 17.8s Quarter mile = 15.7 @ 94mph After 0-60 = 7.4s After 0-100 = 18.0s Quarter mile = 15.9 @ 94mph Test 4 - Before 30-80 = 8.8s After 30-80 = 8.3s I'm sure you'll agree there is some intersting results there. Quite a difference on the timed circuit. They said they thought the 0-60 times were down on the standard wheels as there was less mass for the engine to turn, therefore the wheels tended to spin more when applying the accelerator. Hope this is of some use to some people!

i only say this as i want his wheels,

husky's - ghey