No, I mean I don't know how everyone is so damn skinny. I'm almost 190 and I'm a short bastich compared to a lot of guys.

Heck, my turbo is 2770

I got my SC down to 2450 by taking out most everything that wasn't required. No stereo, one window wiper, bare minimum interior, manual windows and seats. Surprisingly, the ally bumpers aren't that heavy once you lose the pads, and that FG on your car doesn't look particularly lightweight.

Lose the goofy tail and the rocker skirts and you'll be streets ahead for starters. The wheels have already been mentioned, and so has the AC. You can have lightweight or you can have big rice. You can't have both.

Still, I'd be happy with 2650 pounds all things considered. The stock guys are packing 2750 in many cases.

My 996 weights 3050 FWIW. That's with a half tank of gas but without my 230# arse. I haven't started any weight loss program yet. Not seriously anyway.

my 1973 weighs 2270. No driver. 1/4 tank gas.

Now I know why I'm a tub-o. I think skinny people are all crazy in the head.

Damn, that is heavy. Mine was 2450 with half-tank of gas without me in it. It's an '83 euro without a/c (factory), but everything else is identical to u.s. spec. Electric windows, sunroof, etc. Spare/toolkit/jack in place.

You think your bad...
 

[QUOTE=FinallyGotOne;5534714]... and I was behind the wheel. 2920 POUNDS!!!.../QUOTE]

... with all the crap I carry in this quasi DD how about 3102lb (1410kg) with front and rear fiberglass and the A/C compressor is out (I'm taking the rest out soon as in "O'soon hundred"".

I've started to weight the "crap" and 300 lb would be the max... Forgot to weight the roll bar before installing it but it's kind of fix.


Turd behind the wheel: 175 (sumer dress)
Glove box content: 5.5
Fire extinguisher: 3.5
Helmet: 3.5

If she ever need another engine... 3.6 :D:confused::D

P.S. is it just me... but my Smilies (on the right)are in a different order this morninghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1283247074.jpg

Things get complicated when we wonder why are cars are heavier or lighter than the 'standard numbers.'

Curb Weight is generally accepted to be the weight of an empty vehicle with all fluids and a full tank of gas. The listed curb weight for a model is usually for a no-options vehicle. In the U.S., Porsche included a number of 'standard options.' You could only get a truly optionless car by special ordering one with all the standard options deleted.

So when you weigh your 911 and want a meaningful number, you should top off the gas on your weigh to the scale. Guys who want low weights will generally take the easy 120 or so pound bonus of going to the scale with an empty or near-empty tank.

Complicating things further, the German institute for standardization (DIN) has its own definitions of curb weight, which used to include a full tank and also a 75kg allocation for a driver. More recently, they changed the weight figure for the driver to (I think) 68kg, but also added 7kg of luggage allocation. (This is all distinct from laden weight, which assumes a fairly large load of luggage and passengers, but isn't the number enthusiasts and magazines use.)

My car's stock weight was 2370 pounds. But...

...I replaced all the sheet metal except the roof with fiberglass. My rear and quarter windows are Lexan. My rear seat is deleted and replaced with an aluminum panel. I have lightweight racing seats and the armrests are gone. I've got a lightweight battery and aluminum trailing arms. The heater blower is gone. I put in a magnesuim transaxle.

With a full tank of gas and no driver, my car weighs 2500 pounds.

Cage. Fire system. Transaxle cooler. Bigger wheels and brakes. It adds up.

The guys with sub-2000 pound cars always amaze me.

Jack,

I agree with all that you said except for the full tank of gas comment. It is splitting hairs but 1/2 tank of gas is a better indication of how you would actually track the car. You do not start a track day or race with a full tank do you? If yes, I understand the comment.

Also, I would have lost the bet that your car weighs 2500 lbs. I would have expected in the 2200-2300 lb range.

Thanks Jack for the great information, and all the rest of you guys too. Gives me somethng to think about for sure. I did not realize my wheels were so heavy though, but when I think about it, they are quite heavy.

To address the comments. The fibergalss 3.8 tail on my car weighs next to nothing! maybe 7 pounds or so. The front and back bumper covers weighed maybe 4 pounds or so if that. Once I added the aluminum grill, and the lights and blinkers back in, then a bit more, but still extremely light, The car was lightened by removing the aluminum bumps so much that it sat funny and I had to take it to a Air cooled guy to re-lower it and balance again.

I may weigh it again someplace else. But it seems I can lose 40 pounds by removing the spare tire and jack. So I think I'll look to that for starters.

Shakin Joe thanks for that info! I would love to see how much the front and back bumpers with rubber and bumper shocks weigh! I would think easily over 100 pounds combined??

Here you go!


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1283277755.jpg



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1283277766.jpg

What is the flight velocity of an unladen swallow? European of course. :)

Well, gas weighs 6.15 lbs per gallon. With a 21 gallon tank - the gas in a full tank weighs 129 lbs. Not inconsequential.



the airspeed velocity of an unladen European Swallow is ~10 meters per second

Airspeed can also be predicted using a published formula. By inverting this midpoint Strouhal ratio of 0.3 (fA/U ≈ 0.3), Graham K. Taylor et al. show that as a rule of thumb, the speed of a flying animal is roughly 3 times frequency times amplitude (U ≈ 3fA).5

We now need only plug in the numbers:

U ≈ 3fA
f ≈ 15 (beats per second)
A ≈ 0.22 (meters per beat)
U ≈ 3*15*0.22 ≈ 9.9

My cars weighs 1846# wet, and I still know where I can trim a few pounds. I still have steel trailing arms, the stock starter and stock front a-arms..

If I install the alum trailing arms, and 935 front suspension, which I already have, plus install a lightweight starter, I bet the net loss would be another 20#

Getting my car below 1800# will take from really creative work :eek:

LMAO!!!! Is that your pick up line Jeremy?? Don't lie.......!!!!!!!

Oh and in the past few years I have managed to lose 25# of bodyweight.. That is where the next loss will be.. If I can get down to 175# things will be good

Oh and swap my 17" Fikses for my 16" Fuchs

second the comment on finding another scale but that could be accurate. my non sunroof, crank window, a/c delete with no jack, no spare tire and 1/2 tank of gas weighed 2500 lbs without me in it. add 60 more for 1/2 tank, add 180 with me in it, add 100 for a/c, another 30? for sun roof, another 30 for power windows, another 50 for spare and jack.... blah blah blah, 3000 pounds creeps up quick.

you may just have weighed it the way it should have been weighed, with most of the factory crap in it and with you in the seat. It is all what you compare it to. You're still lighter than both of my friends 68 and 64 corvettes :)

0ver the last 10 years I've been working on that weigh reduction in my 72T. It's a lot cheaper than horsepower. Now I bit the bullet and built a 3.0L for it. The empty car, no gas or spare or driver weights 2210lbs. The corner balance came out (with 1/2 tank and driver) 49% front 51% rear.

As I said lots of little things over the years. Aluminum trailing arms, headers, M&K muffler, Webers and the engine drives nothing but the wheels. The net result is 9.0:1 power/weight. Of course you give up a little for that but then I live in Florida.

well, Ok first question Shakin Joe- It seems fr model years 79 there are some parts missing... they say applicable 87-89, on some, and 84-89 on others?? like the rear bumper guards. So is it roughly the same for the 79 Bumperettes?

Also, I am running 74 OEM exhaust and muffler. Deleted the air pump. has pwr windows, etc...
I would think the pump was about 10+ pounds or so, and the exhaust had to be heavier with all the exchangers and such. this 74 system felt lighter?