March 16, 2008 at 5:17 pm #57142
Since I have not been too successful with losing a few excess pounds, I decided to pick on my car, and shed a few kgs there.
Here’s the story so far:
Carb and intake: 6, Dynamo & bracket: 7.3, Total 13.3kg (30 lbs). If I chuck out the spare wheel that will shed 15 kg.
Not much yet really, but I reckon with all the popular upgrades (alu heads, headers, T5 etc) it would knock about 73 kg (160 lbs) off the car.
Just thought you might be interested in the statistics.
March 17, 2008 at 3:00 pm #62106John and Laurie Logan Jr.Participant
Aluminium heads help shed a few pounds.
March 17, 2008 at 9:03 pm #62107
A pair of running shoes costs around $50 and you can drop 20 pounds easy with them. 😉
March 18, 2008 at 2:02 am #62109
Weight reductions :
Aluminum heads and manifold
Aluminum toploader maincase from David Kee
Generator to alternator
Ford Motorsport starter
3 link coilover rear suspension (-45lbs.)
rear disk brakes
Weight additions :
exhaust ( 2 1/2 in.)
15 in. wheels and tires
On a 4 corner scale the car now weighs 2347 lbs.
March 21, 2008 at 7:40 am #62116
What is the purpose of the weight loss? Are you going to race your Tiger? Instead of stripping weight, why not increase your horsepower to overcome the weight issues. I would have thought that 1200Kg’s was a fairly reasonable weight.
March 26, 2008 at 3:29 am #62122
Weighed my car at the WFC race in Indy and it weighed 2980 with me in the car, I know I’m a bit over weight @ 180lbs 😉
March 26, 2008 at 9:58 am #62123quote gtsmrt:
Weight loss improves acceleration, cornering ability (MOI etc), and can reduce fuel consumption as a bonus. So why not aim to shed a few pounds? And there are quite a few opportunities to do this on the tiger.
I do like to ‘use’ my Tiger on the road, and I have also done some track days which are real fun.
When comparing the tiger with the V6 Alpine, the Alpine responds quicker to steering inputs, and, for example on a track day I think I would get through the bends quicker (I am planning to try it this year). There are too many little hot hatchbacks that sneak past the Tiger on bends, espcially at the chicanes. Fitting 15 inch low profiles did help quite a bit there though.
I think my obsession with weight loss all started when I took off the iron intake manifold-much heavier than an Aluminium one. Then I removed the dynamo bracket, another great lump of iron! These changes didnt cost much money, and were easy to do.
Increasing horsepower on the 260 Tiger engine would be great but I would lose some of the wonderful torque available at low revs (send me a 302 and I might be persuaded!).
March 29, 2008 at 3:32 pm #62133John and Laurie Logan Jr.Participant
Two other items: light weight spare tire, as found on 90’s Mustang or 80’s turbo coupe. Lighter weight and allows for a little more space in trunk. And a lot of people neglect to have a good spare. The other is the optima battery, it is smaller than conventional battery, lasts longer. It may cost more up front but should pay for its self in the long run. Another reason to shed pounds is that to get a better horsepower to weight ratio is it canbe cheaper to go lighter to get the same result.
March 31, 2008 at 3:35 am #62137
I had one of the trunk spring pivots break apart. Took both of them off and replaced them with one nitrogen gas strut. I had to make a bracket on the left-side hinge to spread the load that the strut puts on things, but it saves quite a bit of weight over the springs.
March 31, 2008 at 8:33 am #62139
I forgot about the LAT hood. I just need to finish repainting mine and then I will swap it for the steel one. I havent weighed those yet. I noticed that the my LAT hood does not fit if you want to fit the larger (7 inch) brake servo/booster in the regular place by the firewall ( I still have the smaller one).
I have also heard that some guys have ditched their panhard rod on the Tiger ’cause they reckon it causes weird handling problems. I notice that my Tiger does a kind of ‘duck waddle’ when going fast over a hilly road. The Alpine, without a panhard rod doesnt do it.
Anyone out there tried removing their panhard rod? I wonder why Rootes would spend money fitting a part that is no good?
March 31, 2008 at 2:29 pm #62140
i don’t have the panhard rod and never have. my rear wheels are huge and have not fouled the body so i don’t think there is much lateral movement.
i think stiffer springs and harder bushings probably helps.
i would have thought the tiger is too narrow to use a panhard rod.
April 1, 2008 at 2:15 am #62144Jeff NicholsParticipant
Rootes installed the panhard rod to control wheel hop according to Mike Taylor’s book. One problem with the rod is that it was installed on the wrong side on the chassis. MK II’s have the bar installed on the opposite side of the chassis when compared to MK1. Rootes didn’t notice that American engines rotate differently than British. Moving the rod on the MK II was to make the car handle the same in left and right turns.
April 1, 2008 at 4:18 am #62145quote V Mad:
Part of the problem with the Panhard rod is that it’s mounted way too high, and that sets the roll center quite high at the rear. It’s also quite short and that means it’s quickly operating at an angle where the lateral movement is significant.
However, lowering the panhard bar requires that you build a substantial truss to take the load without ripping itself out of the chassis rail. And, as already mentioned, flip the mounts around (on a Mk1/mk1A) so the axle mount is on the right and the frame mount on the left.
April 1, 2008 at 9:32 am #62146
Thanks for the replies.
Whats involved in flipping the rod round the other way? That sounds like an axle out job, with some welding etc.? Then I would still need to lower the rod, presumable at the chassis end, not the axle end?
I suppose the easy thing is to take it off, then decide if the car needs it putting back with the mods?
March 26, 2009 at 1:53 pm #62957
The V8 Alpine we built weighs 2177# on 4 corner scales,
March 27, 2009 at 1:24 am #62959
What was it front to rear on the weight?
Since i put the turbo’s in the rear my was 47% front 53% rear
March 27, 2009 at 12:43 pm #62962
LF 562 RF 586 1162#
LR 509 RR 506 1015#
March 30, 2009 at 1:38 am #62973
Damn that car is light, like i said before mine weighs 2964 with me in the car. There was a Alpine built here in Albq and the guy swore to me it weighed 26 something and i told him he was full of it.
March 30, 2009 at 7:53 pm #62980
John Sybrandts Vintage Racer weights 2500+ got corner weights from him just to see where I. was
it looks like I’m good, by the way Jennings say’s hes down around that weight after dipping??????
April 3, 2009 at 2:34 am #62985
Joel what did you do to get the car so light? what does a Alpine weigh anyway?
April 3, 2009 at 4:21 am #62986quote jkgriffs:
2177 lbs = 987 KGs.. now a stocka lpine is about 1006KGs IIRC.. what body mods have you done.. is this a vintage racer.. no screen or interior?
April 3, 2009 at 12:54 pm #62987
This is a complete car, -door glass 307 CI Ford/T5/8.8 Ford Axle coil over 4 link rear, no body mods
other than removing the fender flanges in the rear for 9.5 wide Tires and rolling the front flanges.
15"wheels/11" brakes/carbon fiber dash/etc etc etc etc nice car to tool around the country roads here in rural america!
April 5, 2009 at 2:12 pm #62989John & Gwen Logan Sr.Participant
Iv’e heard or read several people say that the Alpine engine turns in the oposite direction of the Tiger 260. Is that true?
April 5, 2009 at 5:35 pm #62990
Have No Idea!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.