Sound Deadening Weight & Measure!

[Supracentral]

It's a matter of preference. I drive daily on R compound rubber (VictoRacer V700's). The constant sound of sand, small pebbles, etc getting kicked up into the wheelwells would drive some people crazy. For me the incredible traction is worth it.

To each his own..

By the way, what we really need is something like this for the MKIII:

http://www.suprahardtopregistry.com/WeightReduction/car.php

MKIV hardtop guys get serious about weight reduction. Dave Henry currently holds the record at 2921 lbs.

Duane Stephens is listed as the lightest MKIII on that site at 3430 lbs Scale verified, considerable weight reduction on his car, but he has a roll cage...

There's a reason why I have a MKIV Hardtop. Lightest, best handling Supra ever made.

I wish my MKIII was a hardtop.

 

[Figit090]

There's a reason why I have a MKIV Hardtop. Lightest, best handling Supra ever made.

I wish my MKIII was a hardtop.

since you mention it, how much better does the mkiv handle over the mkIII?

 

[upgradedsupra]

since you mention it, how much better does the mkiv handle over the mkIII?

It doesn't really. Oh ok..maybe from stock but the suspension is very similar.

Duane

 

[Figit090]

oh cool. thanks

 

[Supracentral]

since you mention it, how much better does the mkiv handle over the mkIII?

It doesn't really. Oh ok..maybe from stock but the suspension is very similar.

Duane, you on crack bro? The MKIV handles a LOT better than the III. You can look at the factory skidpad numbers and figure that out.

.89 G for the MKIII
.98 G for the MKIV

But, as Duane mentions, they are similar designs. However, as much as I hate to say it on this site, the IV is a superior chassis. Anyone who argues against that has some serious MKIII bias going on. I own (and love) both cars.

Considering it was designed almost 10 years later, using everything they learned from the MKIII, it's not surprising the MKIV has a few improvements. (That's something a lot of MKIV owners like to forget, the MKIII is it's daddy... )

For it's age the MKIII handles amazingly well. Especially if you ditch the crappy stock spring and shocks and move up to something designed to handle a little better.

Put a set of coilovers and a set of MKIV TT wheels wrapped in VictoRacers (275/40 rear 245/45 front) on a MKIII and it's an amazing upgrade. Suddenly you can see what the engineers really had in mind before the marketing bozo's had them soften the car up. Add a small T4 to that formula and you really see what they were trying getting at. :aigo:

 

[j3pz]

wow this why i love this site ^^^. i learn so much from you guys!

 

[upgradedsupra]

Duane, you on crack bro? The MKIV handles a LOT better than the III. You can look at the factory skidpad numbers and figure that out.

.89 G for the MKIII
.98 G for the MKIV

But, as Duane mentions, they are similar designs. However, as much as I hate to say it on this site, the IV is a superior chassis. Anyone who argues against that has some serious MKIII bias going on. I own (and love) both cars.

yes they do have some better qualities for sure. I said "stock" but when you add some parts they become very close as you can see in my post (unless it was misunderstood). The MKIV with an aluminum engine cradle makes a little difference for weight which in time I am sure it will be made for the MKIII and other things like brakes.

I make parts for the interior and I can tell you 100% that the MKIV is cheaply made vs the MKIII. The suspension is similar and as far as superior..? I need facts and what makes it so much better. I do have to ask since I don't really see this? Please enlighten me Even with "some better qualities", you have to agree that the MKIII looks better at least..Come on I know you wanna say it. I personally don't like catfish hehehehe

Congrats. Your car now sounds like a 15 year old Kia.

:rofl:

My car has full interior (other than the 15 pound rear seats since I have a cage) Nice and comfy OEM seats though! :biglaugh:

Duane

 

[Figit090]

wow this why i love this site ^^^. i learn so much from you guys!

yeah i've learned a LOT in one day from little questions here and there in like..9 threads. its been a very learning-filled day. a busy one at that....but aside the point...

don't the skidpad numbers give it away? i guess the only way to really know would be numbers and tests on two fully adjusted cars, or two completely stock cars with identical tires... :icon_conf

is it possible for a car to exceed 1g without downforce? F-1 cars can..i think...but there's something about the number 1 being the limit...and i'm not sure why...

wait...g stands for... gravity? err? could it be you cannot exceed one g without downforce because all you have holding you down is 1g? its been a while since physics...:nono:

 

[swaq]

In the Road Test Summary section of the December 2006 issue of Road & Track there are eight cars listed for 1.00g or more. One of which is this car:

 

[Figit090]

In the Road Test Summary section of the December 2006 issue of Road & Track there are eight cars listed for 1.00g or more. One of which is this car:

k, thanks. i'll read up on g-forces now.

if any car can do it...its that one.

i'd LOVE to drive one of those..

 

[swaq]

k, thanks. i'll read up on g-forces now.

if any car can do it...its that one.

i'd LOVE to drive one of those..

Me too. I'm rusty with friction coefficients and stuff too, and my physics major fiancee is too involved in other problems right now to think about this one.

FWIW, F1 cars can reach 4g in corners! :aigo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_1

 

[Figit090]

i once read that we could make cars that could hold much more than that...but it would simply kill the driver if he were to turn to quickly....

 

[suprarx7nut]

1 g is an acceleration of 9.8 m/s^2. This is how fast objects are accelerated downward near the Earth's surface.

So if you "pull 4 g's" through a turn you are lateraly accelerating at 4 times the force of gravity. So you could think of it like this:

-If you were to ride a zipline laying down on your side and let go, you would then feel one g of acceleration oriented to one of your sides. Thats a pretty large amount of force.
-Now if you jumped in your F1 car and hit the skid pad, when you turned you could accelerate yourself sideways at 4 TIMES that force of gravity you felt when falling off the zipline.

**Edit, oh and IIRC to obtain 1 g of lateral acceleration, you need either downforce or a lateral force aside from friction(rails like a roller coaster). When you turn you car, you're tires get their grip from the forces holding them to the road.

So you couldn't attain 1.5g's sideways acceleration using only the 1g of force the Earth provides.

 

[Figit090]

ok so i was right...

i dont see any areodynamic aids on that caterham....

and nobody is going to tell me the hood's slope gives it enough push.

there's gotta be something...

it doesnt even have ground effects that would create a low pressure area...what gives?

 

[swaq]

I think it might have a diffuser. Maybe? I couldn't confirm that quickly though and I need to get to bed.

Thanks suprarx7nut, that makes sense.

 

[suprarx7nut]

As for the caterham, I'm confuzzled. Maybe true downforce?(upside down aeroplane wing) Most cars have downforce from air hitting the top side of the vehicle and pushing the car down to the ground.(Newtonian mechanics, IIRC) But as with the Lotus Elise, some sports cars are designed to have an airfoil like surface to their underbody. This creates low pressure under the car, effectively pulling the car down to the ground.

I'M BY NO MEANS SURE OF THIS, just throwing ideas out there.

 

[Figit090]

yeah...thats what i meant by the low pressure area, but like you said....it doesnt look like it has that.

maybe tomorrow i'll look around and see what i can find...but its bedtime now.

 

[suprarx7nut]

For those using weight removal for performance purposes, do you also have ground effects and that under engine sheild that keeps air moving smoothly under the car?


It just seems such drastic weight reductions would only be needed if other avenues had been expended.

Or is cost an issue? I guess taking out parts is a lot easier than buying a kit and such... :dunno:

 

[SySt]

More than 1 G of lateral acceleration is possible with no downforce. A frictional coefficient is just that, co-efficient. To really understand how/why a tires grips you need to dig deeper. No tire has just a given coefficient of friction. Search "Pacejka" on google and you'll see how complicated just simulating a tire can be.

 

[starscream5000]

UNLESS you want to replace it with the better stuff that was mentioned and make it quieter than it was stock... otherwise it seems like too much work...not really a sound issue, while i think it would cause more noise i'm not sure...but i'm pretty sure its a lot of work!!

what about heat? does this stuf shield heat?

Man, could you imagine how much it would cost to dynomat the entire car after it being stripped?! Wow :aigo: