150 replies to this topic

[cicastol]

Talking of "getting a grip" is all very well, but I want a grip and weight reduction.

Yes true,also i want less weight and more grip
Now i'm serching for magnesium alloy wheels,only this types of wheels can provide ultimate weight reduction!!

[barrybethel]

I agree with Bletch and Stu - mostly. Light is nice, but not worth getting your knickers in a twist over if it's not significantly heavier than standard. The durability issue argument put forward by Stu is a bit dubious - read contradictory - when you remember just how weak the original n/a wheels are. The fronts are only stamped to withstand 250kg. My superleggeras stamped for 600kg's

[Thorney]

Now i'm serching for magnesium alloy wheels,only this types of wheels can provide ultimate weight reduction!!

Best buy a few sets then, mags don't last too long on bumpy surfaces

[Whiteboy]

A cheaper option to save weight is to go on a diet This is a very minimal weight gain and lets face it unless you are going to race the thing, it doesnot make any difference,( at this low amount. )

[The Knobs]

If weight is of such a priority, buy a caterham

[speedyK]

This is a very minimal weight gain

Gain? Gain?!! Why put up with any gain when there are other wheels available – in the UK at least , that give you the right size for the Yokos plus the advantage of better dynamics and less weight.

WRT weight, every little bit you can reduce it helps – to quote the man*

"More power makes a car faster on the straight, less weight makes it faster everywhere."

*No, not Ricky , Colin Chapman

Reducing weight is good, adding weight is anathema to the enthusiast. If you've already got your body weight under control, then the weight of the car is the main factor in the responsiveness. I agree that it is somewhat ludicrous when puddings with a Body Mass Index of around 40 ( see >HERE< ) spend thousands to lighten their cars by a kilogramme or two (though I suppose they need all the help they can get ) but for those not overweight, personal weight reduction is not an reasonable option – as my result on the above site shows :

Attached Files

•  BMI.jpg   39.43KB   0 downloads

[speedyK]

If weight is of such a priority, buy a caterham

My bro used to have one. I'm enthusiastic, not suicidal!

[Marco]

Now i'm serching for magnesium alloy wheels,only this types of wheels can provide ultimate weight reduction!!

Best buy a few sets then, mags don't last too long on bumpy surfaces

ah but he lives in Italy where the roads are oh so smoooooth!! I nearly lost my car in some of the pot holes, let alone bending a wheel!!

[Foxy]

I just wanted to add that reduced unsprung weight (wheels, hubs, suspension) is massively different from reducing weight elsewhere (pilot, carpets, wing mirrors )... The whole point of upgrading suspension is to ensure that the tyre is in maximum contact with road at all times - i.e. reacting as quickly as possible to undulations in the surface without 'bouncing'. The suspension must control the unsprung weight: more weight = slower response = less contact with road surface. Heavy wheels are not good for handling

[Sicey]

just had a mail from speedline - wheels are 10.5 Kg and 11 Kg front and rear respectively   

WTF is all that about then when you can get 8kg or less loti ones and save another 1kg on the hubs???

A V V unimpressed CC 

B*llocks! That's appalling. Just when it looked like we had a viable and plausible solution that the Swiss could not refuse.

Looks like mine will be getting new standard 17" Potenzas then . No point in doing a half way solution... will hang on to it till Lotus bring out one that tempts me enough (supercharged 111R/Exige or even S3 in 2005/2006). With lightweight hubs and OZs, you're carrying about 20kgs less unsprung weight – that's a big difference – too big.

I am still in two minds what to do as I will need 2 new rear tyres soon

I love the corsa's but wanted to reduce the unsprung weight a bit as well, so dont know whether to wait a bit longer until something else is available on the market?

@gary - got any pics of your car yet with the new wheels ?

[SPLAM]

but for those not overweight, personal weight reduction is not an reasonable option – as my result on the above site shows :

Speedy i am 36 percentile (whatever that means) are you really 11,


Edit; oh and i forgot to add, i love my wheels even if they are a bit chubby.

Edited by SamH, 27 August 2004 - 06:32 AM.

[RichH]

( Compared to American's weights )

That is one hell of a caveat!!

[cicastol]

AArrrghhhhh!!! Fcuk magnesium alloy, 3000 Euros per set!! Probably i'll take compomotive MO with the same offset of the vxr but in 17" front.

[cyberman]

I just wanted to add that reduced unsprung weight (wheels, hubs, suspension) is massively different from reducing weight elsewhere (pilot, carpets, wing mirrors )...

The whole point of upgrading suspension is to ensure that the tyre is in maximum contact with road at all times - i.e. reacting as quickly as possible to undulations in the surface without 'bouncing'.

The suspension must control the unsprung weight: more weight = slower response = less contact with road surface.

Heavy wheels are not good for handling

Took the words right out of my keyboard. It can't be emphasised enough.

The energy available to deflect the sprung weight (i.e. fat driver) from road surface perturbation is filtered through a damped sprung system with the wheels and tyres on the outboard i.e unsprung end.

The amount of energy transferred trhough the system to the fat driver relates strongly to the weight relationship across the combined sprung / unsprung system although several other elements influence it.

Please note, crap heavy vehicles like rollers and Landcruisers weight 3+tons can have wonderful bump filtering characteristics. Its not only because they have candy floss connections between chassis and wheel: the unsprung assemblies have become a relatively smaller proprotion of the system as gross chassis weight goes up.

Kind regards - Ian

[Foxy]

Took the words right out of my keyboard. It can't be emphasised enough.

See...I don't talk sh*t all the time

[cyberman]

The amount of energy transferred through the system to the fat driver relates strongly to the weight relationship across the combined sprung / unsprung system although several other elements influence it.

Not wanting to start a "my bits are better than your bits" flame war. But I was under the impression that if modest money was no object then bolting on the Exige suspension setup was the preferred way to go.

I believe this gives a fully adjustable geometry. Access to the maximum sets of springs and dampers. The lotus disks and uprights and the nice lightweight OZ wheels etc. I thought something similar was done for the VXR?

I believe the unsprung weight saving is significant and may be as much as 8-10kg / corner. Please don't shoot, it was some months since I last added it up and I don't have the reference. But 8/10kg per corner would be LOTS.

Kind regards - Ian



This gives fully adjustable

[garyk220]

My car will be 40kg or so lighter than standard when I get the wheels fitted. Anyone able to drive a car close to it's limits on track would notice the difference. It will brake later, corner faster and accelerate quicker. Much the same effect as driving with and without a passenger. Admittedly the difference will only be a few tenths of a second, but it will handle better. If you only do a few trackdays, I agree it is probably not worth the effort. But when you are spending thousands making the car quicker, a bit of effort to save a few kilos is well worth it. And while pro drivers will drive a VX quicker than most, the difference between one and a quick, experienced driver from this forum may not be as big as you'd think. We are not talking F1 levels of grip here, so a competent driver will be able to get the VX very close to its limits on a track they are familiar with. The difference is, as pro driver will post quick times lap after lap, with very few errors.