Biggest Loser...Fit edition.
#61
05-06-2010 | 01:00 AM
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 175
From: Austin, TX, USA
I gotta say that I poked around for 20minutes in the TopGear site trying to find the article... frustrating! I'm usually fast at finding stuff but their search function is crap. Anyway, it was very informative & listed exactly how much they removed from the car and what the starting weight was. I seem to remember The Stig having the tail come loose often, so may a bit more tire out back might help, also playing with the anti-sway bars would be an idea. I'll try looking through my history and report back!
Edit: Doh! that was quick : http://www.topgear.com/UK/photos/how...-car?imageNo=0
Edit: Doh! that was quick : http://www.topgear.com/UK/photos/how...-car?imageNo=0
Last edited by !bungle; 05-06-2010 at 01:02 AM.
#62
05-06-2010 | 01:36 AM
Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,899
From: tx
Interesting article, although there were a lot of factors noted about why the times were not better. Top gear is a lot of fun, but to be taken lightly - especially these days. It's just so outrageous!
Some suspension tuning would help correct the new weight distribution. If there was something completely flawed with this, then fwd race cars wouldn't run gutted interiors. A battery relocation could help a little bit too. If miata guys run them, and some of those aren't much lighter than the fit with a better f/r balance to begin with, then it couldn't hurt. We are after maximum performance after all.
I still don't think there is anything wrong with tuning the hell out of the fit. It's not a sports car, but there isn't another car that does what it does. If there are products that are similar, then there is a big trade-off in there somewhere.
Some suspension tuning would help correct the new weight distribution. If there was something completely flawed with this, then fwd race cars wouldn't run gutted interiors. A battery relocation could help a little bit too. If miata guys run them, and some of those aren't much lighter than the fit with a better f/r balance to begin with, then it couldn't hurt. We are after maximum performance after all.
I still don't think there is anything wrong with tuning the hell out of the fit. It's not a sports car, but there isn't another car that does what it does. If there are products that are similar, then there is a big trade-off in there somewhere.
#64
05-06-2010 | 01:41 AM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Hey, do not worry about weight distribution, the lighter something is, the faster it can change directions. So what you are doing is fine.
misc. note......
Man the stock catback is amazingly light, It would be difficult to save much weight with an after market item.
The air cond. condenser and brackets are very light also, had that loose when I was installing horns.
misc. note......
Man the stock catback is amazingly light, It would be difficult to save much weight with an after market item.
The air cond. condenser and brackets are very light also, had that loose when I was installing horns.
#65
05-06-2010 | 01:52 AM
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
I gotta say that I poked around for 20minutes in the TopGear site trying to find the article... frustrating! I'm usually fast at finding stuff but their search function is crap. Anyway, it was very informative & listed exactly how much they removed from the car and what the starting weight was. I seem to remember The Stig having the tail come loose often, so may a bit more tire out back might help, also playing with the anti-sway bars would be an idea. I'll try looking through my history and report back!
Edit: Doh! that was quick : How fat is your car? - BBC Top Gear
Edit: Doh! that was quick : How fat is your car? - BBC Top Gear
Great article...the conclusion I took was slightly different than yours...and I quote, "Properly set up, Stig reckoned [it] could have saved three seconds a lap" after shedding the weight.
#66
05-06-2010 | 04:13 AM
This is the route I am most likely going to go, I wanted to have Kent Works make a one-off Ti system, but they didn't seem very interested since my Nihongo was not fluent.
Last edited by 555sexydrive; 05-06-2010 at 04:18 AM.
#67
05-06-2010 | 08:10 AM
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 175
From: Austin, TX, USA
I still am in agreement that it's better to lighten your ride wherever it's practical, especially rotating (& unsprung) weight. I think you will get some good results with your Fit. I do have to add that completely ignoring weight dist. (as someone pointed out) is not the "best" way to go. Your handling gains will definitely be greater if you experiment with it.
I just thought the article would provide some interesting ideas and back up my comment that proper set-up should be part of the equation...
Last edited by !bungle; 05-06-2010 at 08:12 AM.
#68
05-06-2010 | 04:12 PM
Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 251
From: Bothell, WA
couple of points to make about this statement:
1. I am assuming the fit is not a sportscar statement is just a jab at the post currently running about that very statement. if not, please read it.
2. not a bad idea about driver's losing weight. I know i need to.
3. I personally shed 78 lbs from removing the rear seats, belts, and brackets (inc. the belt in the ceiling and rears behind the body panels). I know you wouldn't understand this because it seems like your mods are about adding things to the car instead of taking away, but I seriously really can feel the difference. is it faster? maybe. is it quicker? most definitely. Think about it: 100 lbs out of a car that weighs 2500 is a greater overall percentage loss and more effective than losing 100 lbs on a heavier vehicle. Same point can be made about the engine: 100 lbs out of a car that makes 100 some horsepower is going to be way more effective than losing 100 lbs on a more powerful vehicle.
Sorry, but you just can't argue with physics.
1. I am assuming the fit is not a sportscar statement is just a jab at the post currently running about that very statement. if not, please read it.
2. not a bad idea about driver's losing weight. I know i need to.
3. I personally shed 78 lbs from removing the rear seats, belts, and brackets (inc. the belt in the ceiling and rears behind the body panels). I know you wouldn't understand this because it seems like your mods are about adding things to the car instead of taking away, but I seriously really can feel the difference. is it faster? maybe. is it quicker? most definitely. Think about it: 100 lbs out of a car that weighs 2500 is a greater overall percentage loss and more effective than losing 100 lbs on a heavier vehicle. Same point can be made about the engine: 100 lbs out of a car that makes 100 some horsepower is going to be way more effective than losing 100 lbs on a more powerful vehicle.
Sorry, but you just can't argue with physics.
Last edited by vwli; 05-06-2010 at 04:15 PM.
#70
05-06-2010 | 05:43 PM
Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 251
From: Bothell, WA
I also know that it is a pain to store the removed seat, and install it every time you need to haul passengers. I wonder how many Fit owners are willing to do that. Like I said in my previous post, this mod is only good for a small group of people.
#71
05-06-2010 | 05:44 PM
Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 270
From: Los Angeles, CA
what is your point?
You are sacrifying functionality over minimum acceleration and handling gain by removing 78lbs of backseat over 2200 lbs car (3.5%). In reality you would never gain 3.5% even Newton told you so in his Physics book. Areodynamic drag is a big factor when you go into higher speed which the weight loss is not going to help. But you lost 3/5 the passenger carrying capacity (Fit is designed to carry 5, now you can only carry 2). May be that theoretical 3.5% gain is worth it for 1 out of 100 people who never would carry more than 2 in the Fit.
Nobody gives a sh!t about you adding weight to your car, thus sacrificing handling for whatever it is you would rather have in exchange. So, why are you getting all bent on whatever it is that other ppl are doing to their cars?
-Rob
ps, gbaby, I changed my icon. As much as I'd hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with most of the stuff you say. Even if you do call me a fat douche and neg rep me every other month. ha.
#72
05-06-2010 | 05:49 PM
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,346
From: Small Town WI
I'm sorry, but what point are you trying to make? Obviously anyone who is taking out their rear seats knows that the passenger carrying capacity goes from 5 to 2. So, aside from you not agreeing with the particular mods people are making to THEIR cars, what is it exactly that you are trying to say?
Nobody gives a sh!t about you adding weight to your car, thus sacrificing handling for whatever it is you would rather have in exchange. So, why are you getting all bent on whatever it is that other ppl are doing to their cars?
-Rob
ps, gbaby, I changed my icon. As much as I'd hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with most of the stuff you say. Even if you do call me a fat douche and neg rep me every other month. ha.
Nobody gives a sh!t about you adding weight to your car, thus sacrificing handling for whatever it is you would rather have in exchange. So, why are you getting all bent on whatever it is that other ppl are doing to their cars?
-Rob
ps, gbaby, I changed my icon. As much as I'd hate to admit it, I find myself agreeing with most of the stuff you say. Even if you do call me a fat douche and neg rep me every other month. ha.
to the guy who kitty quoted (i don't remember your name haha), this may blow your mind but if i had a Fit i'd take out the backseat too
i barely drive with multiple passengers, i'd gladly store a seat and gain a very small amount of mpg and have the old butt dyno a lil happier
#73
05-06-2010 | 07:12 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
You are sacrifying functionality over minimum acceleration and handling gain by removing 78lbs of backseat over 2200 lbs car (3.5%). In reality you would never gain 3.5% even Newton told you so in his Physics book. Areodynamic drag is a big factor when you go into higher speed which the weight loss is not going to help. But you lost 3/5 the passenger carrying capacity (Fit is designed to carry 5, now you can only carry 2). May be that theoretical 3.5% gain is worth it for 1 out of 100 people who never would carry more than 2 in the Fit.
What functionality is destroyed, if you only carry one or 2 people???????
I have the small rear section back in for the moment (takes me 2 minutes, kids are in sports mode
)If you are not into the weight removal thing, why bother posting?
Which I only rudely add because of favorite comments on threads here like...............
"Why bother removing weight yada yada?
"why bother modding, the Fit is not a sports car"
I say folks on car forums like to, in general, modify their cars to their liking, and more power to them, pun intended
The ones who want to will, and the ones that do not want to wont.
Honestly, looking foolish here, if it is not your thing, maybe move on to something that is your thing
Last edited by Tork; 05-06-2010 at 07:27 PM.
#75
05-06-2010 | 10:10 PM
Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 251
From: Bothell, WA
There is no need to be nasty about it. I am simply expressing my opinion. If you do not agree, it is perfectly fine with me. I never get upset when someone reply my post saying do not like my mod. But please don't act like a bunch of Communists suppressing the freedom of speech in America. After all, this is a public forum and I never violate any rules. I may be rude in my first post joking around about driving naked to save weight which I do apologize.
#78
05-06-2010 | 10:38 PM
LOL... removing weight on the Fit is far from stupid (specially when it's free 
)... what i find hilarious is people that pay 2000$ to slap 50pounds of plastic crap on a hyundai... last week i saw an accent with body kits, scoops and vinyl, and i also saw a tiburon with the same set up... 
)... what i find hilarious is people that pay 2000$ to slap 50pounds of plastic crap on a hyundai... last week i saw an accent with body kits, scoops and vinyl, and i also saw a tiburon with the same set up...
#80
05-06-2010 | 10:40 PM
Alright...time to get serious. No more "I think," "I heard," or "so-and-so told me." We need to start an "Official OEM parts weight list." All "official weights" will be verified by a pic showing said part on a scale. (Preferably two separate scales and take an average of the two). The picture will be posted underneath the listed part. (555sexydrive...I will add your weights when you post a pic showing the parts on the scale.)
We can add more parts as we go...may be surprised by how much some of this junk weighs
. It might also be useful to separate USDM and JDM.
This is off the top of my head.
We can add more parts as we go...may be surprised by how much some of this junk weighs
. It might also be useful to separate USDM and JDM.This is off the top of my head.