Kitcat Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 Based on above, my 1700 Kent Crossflow weighs about 260 & the T9 tranny 90 for 350 total. I like to think of it as being stout, not heavy. My car weighs 1225lbs, or 875lbs for everything minus power train. The wheel/tire combo is about 30 lbs per corner so that's another 120 lbs., leaving the rest of the car at about 755 lbs. Lightness abounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR27.Seth Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Seth, do these weights include exhaust manifold? It includes cast iron exhaust manifolds with turbo and downpipe- that alone is between 35-45# (depending on the size of your turbo) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandurath Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 Heheh reading on the weights, my 2.3t may weigh more than his v8 doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandurath Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Well, an LS1 looks to weigh in at 460 lbs (bacomatic number) and i got 512lbs from another forum where he weighed his (2.3T) wet, running including T-5 trans at 521. So minus trans, that puts it in the 440 lbs range. So, counting my trans, intercooler, and rear assembly I will already be heavier than some here more than likely. Thats without a car around the running gear....... So much for lightweight, though, compared to a dealer bought car it will still be light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnK Posted November 28, 2007 Share Posted November 28, 2007 My 2 cents worth - 2004 S2000 engine and trans, both dry, no manifold 405lbs on 3 bathroom scales ( not accuracy certified !) While I'm pretty fond of Honda engineering that Caterham ( which Ford ?) and 6-speed of yellowss7's is pretty attractive, not to mention LIGHT. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowss7 Posted November 28, 2007 Share Posted November 28, 2007 It's a Rover K Series, not a Ford :ack: :d It's a great engine, very light, revvy and sounds fabulous. Unfortunately, due to the exchange rate, its really pricey now. See http://www.minister-power.com/support/index.htm Go to Engines, then MG/Rover engines, then mine is the 205. The 240 hp one is a real beast!!! Add in the Dry sump, Flywheel, clutch, water rail, exhaust, starter, air filter, and dyno run and then multiply by $2.00++ and then add in shipping, customs duty, and state sales tax. :cry: :cry: Exchange rate was only $1.47 when I bought it. Look at the 240 hp version if you really want to cry. Tom Oh, and that doesn't include the cost of the Caterham 6 speed!!!! When ever someone asks me what it costs to build a 7, I say, it depends on how stupid you are :d Pretty, stupid eh?:crazy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnK Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 Back when I started reading the UK Se7ens list I couldn't help but see that the Rover was a very attractive unit. Very light, loves to rev, sounds great, lots of uprating parts, and very much in the spirit of the Se7en. I envy you having that setup. I took the conservative/sensible (read,cowardly) route with the S2000 engine. I was in a position to build up a Zetec (which is more like the Rover than the Honda) and tune it properly; had access to a machine shop with machinist I could work with, a dyno and over a year's very successful experience working with electronic engine management systems. Then I saw a car with the S2000 engine - 240 HP and a 6-speed that the Honda engineers had matched to the power curve of the engine. I realized it could take me a huge amount of time as well as money to get that much power and anywhere near the drivability, and then I had to guess at matching the ratios of a pretty expensive transmission to what I would build - and decided I probably didn't have enough time left to accomplish all that and get it all right. The downside, beyond this engine's being heavy is that it's tall - it's ideal if you put it behind you, but then it wouldn't be a Se7en. I'm thinking of converting to Hinduism so that I can come back (reincarnate) and get started on my Se7en sooner in my next lifetime ;-) . Congrats on your choice and acquisition of the Rover and the Caterham trans. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 I have some updated numbers on the LS1/T56 combo from another forum: Just for the record, we weighed out LS1&T56 on 3 scales. The drivetrain was complete with engine, harness, intake, all front end accessories (alt, a/c, ps pump) T56 with 4qts Dexron and our engine mounts. All-up weight was 603 lbs, with 260lbs at each engine mount and 83lbs on the tranny mount. T56 weighs 140 lbs, so engine + all accessories (not including ex man?) =460 lbs. I have no idea how much A/C comp weighs... probably 20 lbs? so, 440 lbs is probably a good number for the LS1. With a TKO500 tranny, the combo will come in at 510. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDrye Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 Seth: The total weight of my 7, full of gas is only 1131 lbs. I don't think that my intake is much lighter than the stock one that you are using. I'm probably saving 20 lbs or so on the exhaust manifold. I should be ready for the dyno by March. (Hoping for over 550 hp) SR20DET Motor 375# (I know it is heavy for an all aluminum block, but the turbo and manifold weigh 32 lbs alone and the Crank weighs a bit over 35lbs!!- more than some v-8s, but how else would you expect a stock bottom end to take 600 horsies?) Trans (5spd) 90# total 470# Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 Well, an LS1 looks to weigh in at 460 lbs (bacomatic number) and i got 512lbs from another forum where he weighed his (2.3T) wet, running including T-5 trans at 521. So minus trans, that puts it in the 440 lbs range. So, counting my trans, intercooler, and rear assembly I will already be heavier than some here more than likely. Thats without a car around the running gear....... So much for lightweight, though, compared to a dealer bought car it will still be light. I started into this intending on using a 2.3T, got one laying around, till I compared weight to a 302 or 351. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 Seth: The total weight of my 7, full of gas is only 1131 lbs. That's pretty impressive. I gotta really sit down and figure out why my car weighs so much (besides the drivetrain) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boxologist Posted January 5, 2008 Share Posted January 5, 2008 I would suspect the amenities. Like bolts than mount the seat. cup holder (DVDR drive), dual 5 1/4 disk drives. 10 MB hard drive:lol: alarm system (120 lb rottweiler). these items can really weight down a performance car. I hope Arya can sort thru these best he can with u not there.:bigears: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted January 5, 2008 Share Posted January 5, 2008 I would suspect the amenities. Like bolts than mount the seat. cup holder (DVDR drive), dual 5 1/4 disk drives. 10 MB hard drive:lol: alarm system (120 lb rottweiler). these items can really weight down a performance car. I hope Arya can sort thru these best he can with u not there.:bigears: Alot of that is already gone. but additional weight is coming with heavier roll bar. Not sure how much weight will be saved this go-around. One thing that is for sure, a higher % will be over the rear wheels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locostv8 Posted January 5, 2008 Share Posted January 5, 2008 Something that would be interesting would be to have Ary measure the thickness of removed tubing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhc Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Ref the weight of the engine. Its always the total weight of the car and the weight distribution ,front to rear that counts. S2000 engine in a Westfield 480 kgs less petrol, 52--48 split less driver. http://usa7s.com/aspnetforum/upload/1090477673_IMG_0714[1] http://usa7s.com/aspnetforum/upload/2131775772_IMG_0715[1] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Something that would be interesting would be to have Ary measure the thickness of removed tubing. You mean for the roll bar? The rest of the frame is .065 I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slngsht Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Ref the weight of the engine. Its always the total weight of the car and the weight distribution ,front to rear that counts. S2000 engine in a Westfield 480 kgs less petrol, 52--48 split less driver. Weight distribution is very important, but let's not discount power to weight ratio as well as power to drag coef * frontal area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now