weight distribution?
#1
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bellevue, WA.
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
weight distribution?
i was wondering does anyone know what the weight distirubition of my 9 z28 M6
i donno is that the right word but, for instance c5==48/52 i donno if its right either but i really wanna know mine
Thanx in advance
i donno is that the right word but, for instance c5==48/52 i donno if its right either but i really wanna know mine
Thanx in advance
#2
TECH Veteran
Here's some front/rear weight distribution percentages I found:
2005 Ford Mustang GT: 54/46
http://www.valvoline.com/carcare/art...cid=4&scccid=2
2004 Pontiac GTO: 55/45
http://www.aicautosite.com/Reviews/2004-pontiac-gto.asp
2003 Corvette, regular C5: 51/49, C5 Z06: 53/47
http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2003/specs.shtml
2002 Camaro Z28: 55/45
http://www.engine-power.com/chevy/camaro_z28.html
2002 Firebird V6 and Formula: 55/45
2002 Trans Am: 56/44
http://www.carseverything.com/conten...rticle/1328.4/
1990 Camaro RS: 58/42
1990 Ford Mustang LX: 58/42
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/ar...shootout.shtml
1988 Camaro IROC-Z: 57.1/42.9
1988 Firebird Formula: 55.4/44.6
1988 Ford Mustang GT: 55.4/44.6
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles/gt.shtml
1987 Camaro IROC-Z: 58/42
1987 Ford Mustang GT: 57/43
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles/vs.shtml
1974 Camaro Z28: 56.1/43.9
http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro74.html
1973 Camaro Z28: 57.3/42.7
http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro73.html
2005 Ford Mustang GT: 54/46
http://www.valvoline.com/carcare/art...cid=4&scccid=2
2004 Pontiac GTO: 55/45
http://www.aicautosite.com/Reviews/2004-pontiac-gto.asp
2003 Corvette, regular C5: 51/49, C5 Z06: 53/47
http://www.corvettemuseum.com/specs/2003/specs.shtml
2002 Camaro Z28: 55/45
http://www.engine-power.com/chevy/camaro_z28.html
2002 Firebird V6 and Formula: 55/45
2002 Trans Am: 56/44
http://www.carseverything.com/conten...rticle/1328.4/
1990 Camaro RS: 58/42
1990 Ford Mustang LX: 58/42
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/ar...shootout.shtml
1988 Camaro IROC-Z: 57.1/42.9
1988 Firebird Formula: 55.4/44.6
1988 Ford Mustang GT: 55.4/44.6
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles/gt.shtml
1987 Camaro IROC-Z: 58/42
1987 Ford Mustang GT: 57/43
http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles/vs.shtml
1974 Camaro Z28: 56.1/43.9
http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro74.html
1973 Camaro Z28: 57.3/42.7
http://www.nastyz28.com/camaro/camaro73.html
#3
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bellevue, WA.
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow man ur great How did you do that I was expecting something like 65-35, my car is pretty good too then!!! Maybe i should put a rear anti sway bar too for better handling, and change the front one with a lighter one
#4
Source: Car & Driver, February 1999
1999 Camaro Z28, 6-speed manual, hardtop
Curb weight: 3,443 lbs.
Weight distribution: 55.9/44.1 (front/rear)= 1,924.6/1,518.4
So that's just over 200 lbs. deducted from the front and added to the rear to make it 50/50.
If you're really serious about getting as close to 50/50 as possible, get one of those battery relocaters, which moves your battery to the trunk. Also a lightweight front k-member, and upper and lower a-arms would help.
1999 Camaro Z28, 6-speed manual, hardtop
Curb weight: 3,443 lbs.
Weight distribution: 55.9/44.1 (front/rear)= 1,924.6/1,518.4
So that's just over 200 lbs. deducted from the front and added to the rear to make it 50/50.
If you're really serious about getting as close to 50/50 as possible, get one of those battery relocaters, which moves your battery to the trunk. Also a lightweight front k-member, and upper and lower a-arms would help.
#5
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bellevue, WA.
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good ideas man, i was also thinking about removing my AC but not sure really, cause i kinda wanna keep the car original as factory lookin . I want the best handling for my car, so should I also change my rear suspension system, or what can i do?
#6
Originally Posted by yekta
good ideas man, i was also thinking about removing my AC but not sure really, cause i kinda wanna keep the car original as factory lookin . I want the best handling for my car, so should I also change my rear suspension system, or what can i do?
Basically, weight reduction is the best thing you can do for a car when it comes to performance. Not only will the car be faster, but it will handle better and brake better also. You just don't want to lose a lot of weight in the rear and less in the front because that will be less weight over your rear tires, meaning less traction.
Check out the suspension section, and ask some people there about certain suspension parts. They could help you a lot better than I could.