Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Weight\s+and\s+Balance\s+stuff\s+again\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Weight\s+and\s+Balance\s+stuff\s+again\s*$/: 45 ]

Total 45 documents matching your query.

1. Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: "Keith Turk" <kturk@ala.net>; Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 08:42:24 -0500; Well it's time to scale another car and I'm going to stick the Camaro on the scales just for giggles... should be fun to see how close I keep it over the last 4 yrs.. I haven't looked at the Achieves; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00403.html (8,873 bytes)
2. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Glenn Ridlen <gridlen@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 08:12:25 -0700 (PDT); Keith How did you determine that was the best weight distribution? Does the Camaro just seem happy there? I wasn't in on the thread earlier....if you look it up let me know where it is. I am particul; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00405.html (9,512 bytes)
3. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Nt788@aol.com; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:47:23 EDT; << I think we are better served by weight in the tail where it also resists direction change. Would welcome any comments. The ignorant other trucker from east Texas....Glenn Plant the front, let the; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00410.html (8,455 bytes)
4. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 08:56:42 -0700 (PDT); Glenn, are you referring solely to center of gravity (CG) and/or centroid axis (CA)? CA is weight located close to the centerline of the car (vertical axis or moment). CA varies quite a bit due to co; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00411.html (11,053 bytes)
5. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:56:57 -0700 (PDT); Glenn, I would think that the farther away you place weight from the intersection of CG and CA, the more difficult it will be to control or change direction of that weight. I believe this was always; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00420.html (9,731 bytes)
6. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 12:03:21 -0700 (PDT); "Sorta like throwing a hammer, the heavy end always wants to lead." Then why would you want to add weight in back of the rear axle, thereby increasing the moment arm? John ___________________________; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00421.html (9,246 bytes)
7. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Glenn Ridlen <gridlen@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 12:27:18 -0700 (PDT); I agree rear engine cars tend to be tail heavy and can be problematic..mid engine improves that greatly. That is probably the ultimate for low moment since the heavy components are in the middle of; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00422.html (10,419 bytes)
8. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 12:58:20 -0700 (PDT); I respectfully disagree. Road racing cars are surely designed to increase tire patch grip via sound suspension design, chassis rigidity, springs, dampers, aero, etc. but straightline stability is one; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00424.html (11,218 bytes)
9. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Glenn Ridlen <gridlen@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 15:48:21 -0700 (PDT); I agree that most of the basic principles apply to all cars but I submit that the requirements for LSR and road raceing are very different. To demonstrate my point... we have an ordinary chevy pick; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00430.html (11,636 bytes)
10. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: "Thomas E. Bryant" <saltracer@awwwsome.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:02:31 -0700; The simple answer, from my point of view, is if you add weight to the rear for traction, (Conventional wisdom of old), it works great unless you spin the tires. If it still spins the tires the rear; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00432.html (11,477 bytes)
11. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:19:06 -0700 (PDT); "we have an ordinary chevy pick up that acts like it is "on rails" at nearly 200MPH on the other hand I doubt that it would be very impressive as a road racer." That is what we all seek in our LSR ca; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00433.html (10,237 bytes)
12. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:27:50 -0700 (PDT); "The center of mass behind the center of gravity." Amen but not too far behind CG. Your statement above goes to the heart of my comment on CG intersect with CA. It may have been better for me to refe; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00434.html (10,718 bytes)
13. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Glenn Ridlen <gridlen@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:43:26 -0700 (PDT); center of mass behind the center of gravity. Guess I don't understand the difference between the center of mass and the center of gravity....thought it was the same thing. Glenn -- SBC Yahoo! DSL - N; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00435.html (9,381 bytes)
14. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: John Goodman <ggl205@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 18:23:15 -0700 (PDT); "center of mass and the center of gravity....thought it was the same thing." Glenn, you are correct, CG and CM are the same. They both refer to a balance point. What I am apparently not saying proper; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00436.html (10,450 bytes)
15. RE: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:48:40 -0500; you and John are getting me really confused here with the terminology. Hrd to figure out what you mean. This is a very simple concept, so I'll really be embarrassed if I'm remebering it wrong-- but; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00437.html (9,749 bytes)
16. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: bernie brown <bernien2@swbell.net>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 21:44:55 -0500; The truck Glenn is talking about has most wt between the axles,so supports your point . 35 gal water in fuel tank and much lead in bed. Would be better along the frame, but we have more pressing mat; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00440.html (9,898 bytes)
17. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: "John Beckett" <saltracer@servusa.com>; Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 10:26:31 -0400; 51% front and 49% rear works great. Camaro just seem happy there? I wasn't in on the thread earlier....if you look it up let me know where it is. I am particularly interested in any comments about mo; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00446.html (10,889 bytes)
18. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Glenn Ridlen <gridlen@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:26:14 -0700 (PDT); I am referring to the moment around the vertical axis....I agree that he weight should be placed as low as possible for our purposes....drag racers may want it a bit higher for weight transfer. My o; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00454.html (8,795 bytes)
19. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: "Glen Barrett" <speedtimer@charter.net>; Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:53:43 -0700; Sorta like throwing a hammer, the heavy end always wants to lead. In the archives I believe Tom Bryant has written something about weight placement etc. on his coupe. Look it up. Glen /// unsubscribe; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00455.html (8,620 bytes)
20. Re: Weight and Balance stuff again (score: 1): Author: Nt788@aol.com; Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:33:13 EDT; << Sorta like throwing a hammer, the heavy end always wants to lead." >> Weight both ends and throw it again. Jack /// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try /// http:; /html/land-speed/2003-06/msg00463.html (9,082 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3]