MR2 SpyderChat banner
1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Windshield washer fluid - only need a couple ounces in your tank.
Replaced the bottle with a bag holding 1 liter max.

Also no speakers, replaced head unit with a twing USB port and Voltage meter.

Took the interior rear view mirror out because the blind spot it causes annoyed me to no end.

Did quite a bit more deletes. Last weighed the car on the bridge at 880 kgs and took some more out since but put the cat back so it will be 880 about.

As the engine is coming out, thinking of a lightweight flywheel.

The car is strictly road and in a way my daily but I live in the andalucian mountains, do nó commuting and there are months that I don´t see a traffic light or traffic worth that name.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Next time I'm come back to Madrid I'll have to check that out. All the mountains here in Colorado have slow SUV's and minivans in my way.

How in the world did you get that light? From the pictures all it looks like you did was pull the stereo. That's seriously light!
Touge heaven here in the Andalucían heartland where I live. Just stay off the most scenic bits on Sundays and festive days; cyclists.
Thoúsands of wonderfull local mountain road kms. The southern mountain range runs from about Jérez to Almeria with two snow peaked bits one of which being the original Sierra Nevada.

Did quíte a bit more. You must have missed it. Got insulted nastily even about it on here.

At the moment it´s on the bridge: Ate a big end bearing and next it was clobbered by an SUV on the parking lot.
Looking into a lightweight flywheel now. The effect of which is multiplied depending on which gear you are in but a 10-12 lbs one averages over the forst three gears to the effect of about 25 kilos off the car. The lighter the car, the greater the effect. More so in the mountains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
If he’s using a bridge scale it’s likely rated for 5 axle vehicles and therefore is only accurate to within say 200-300 pounds.

~250 pounds off a Spyder isn’t unheard of but yes I do question the accuracy of his methods.
The not all that US size weighbridge accross the road is simply Q&D within 20 kgs (10 up, 10 dwn). It is for the local farmers with a trailer behind the old LandRover.
Also have a digital 250 kg scale. A bit of faffing with the jack, equal hight bricks and presto.

The only inaccuracy is the amount of fuel :geek:
With tank topped up it is júst under 900 with the cat mounted.
But hey, you lot believe whatever you want anyway. Enjoy!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
From the pictures all it looks like you did was pull the stereo.
I wondered, which pictures?
Should be racing buckets and no carpeting there too no?! :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

FYI, my son has built a rather large 3D printer and occasionally surprises me. Like with the 60% lighter struts for the silly big rear wing.
The car is first and formost a FUN project see to enjoy the local mountain roads in charmning company, not nééding it for work or such. I can live with quircks and if the charming company objects, she does not háve to come along!.
The only ´commuting´ I do is trek from the one gf to the other.
Like just for the fun of it we, me and the other gf, made a traditional soft tonneau cover for it. Looks éver so cool and is unexpectedly practical. Have not had anything else on for over three months.


She also made me a Panda suit and yes I drive around in it if I feel like that.



Will spare you the photo the gf made of me driving draped in a faux leopard pelt head and all. Ónly that :cool:
La vida es bella (y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Got a new one for you. Not sure this is a street item but....

Acrylic 9 lbs windshield.
Would have fitted one lòng ago if it were not for prohibitive shipping costs/duties.

Currently going for a CC Ultralight flywheel as I have everything dismantled anyway.

Door cards imo only make sense if you also delete the electric winders and fit fixed acrylic side windows. The latter being a NoNo for a cabrio imo.

Lighter, non electric mirrors áre wortwhile imo. You do need a plate to cover the large hole they leave. Have not come around to fabricating a set.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
More importantly I have rid the car for the mirror scoops that threw sand in my face driving the interstate with the windows down.
Mongos will do that too.
Have a véry cool photo of this but there is a nude gf in it too :rolleyes:
Have driven all summer, May to about three weeks ago when it ate a big end bearing, just about exclusively with the windows down.

Ádded weight today :eek:
With the engine out filled the engine mounts with polyurethane.

Here ideas for you, notably reduces the MR2; the moment of inertia.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
I thought you were joking. It really is a windshield washer bag. Neat!
Since bumper/bottle delete is as far removed from the COM as it gets, the mass x radius squared is surprising. Should not be surprsing but then not many gét why the car is named MR2....
Ah and then it is also in frónt of the front axle. Another effect on the direction stability.

Weight reduction always counts but how much it counts depends on whére you reduce it.
Wheels are a good example as those are both unsprung and rotating.
Same thing anthing rotating like flywheel, pulleys.
The there are the distance from the COM and the hight of the weight.

Also lightened the rear end quite a lot. Effect on rotational inertia and weight distribution.

As to the small bits in the interior, well, they do count as it is all weight but on the directional stability it has no effect. Yes, did even take the shield under the dash/steering colums out as 350 gramm is 350 gramm but is really is silly buggers.
The windscreen would be another motter being heavy and high up. But alas :-(

The hood and rear lid I would like to replace too but again shipping cost make it prohibitive. Bought a second bonnet from the scrap yard to use a mold to have a go at a grp one myself. Just have not come around to it.

All in all did not get below 900 kilo topped up by joking @Node :cool:
Also, because I am aware of whát I do, thus whére I take the weight off, my car is áwesomely quick steering! and with the PAS delete gives me ideal feedback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
This is worse than a bicycle (mtb) weight weanie post I've seen. Lol...
On a bicycle it is way simpler because apart from the rims there is no moment of inertia. On a car it is where one with a bit of forethought can gain a lót of agility. Or not shoot the car in the feet with larger diameter rims ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
No, but it would reduce weight.
You will be surprised how much more notable replacing the oem muffler by a lightweight one is and even more natable stiil only unbolting the front crash bar.
The 30 kilos of fuel sit bang on the center of giration.
It is a nice test to do a swisty norm route with the tank full, with the light on, then with the frump loaded with 30 kilos vs empty.

Still, yes, 30 kilos remaisn 30 kilos. I have the nearest petrol station at 1 km. only and it is also the drop off point for every package I receive so I fill up 15 liters when the light has been on for 15 - 60 kms.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
How does removing front crash bar affect handling as far as flex from strut towers through to front chassis rail ends go?
Two totally different things:
The crash bar does nothing to stiffness and removing decreases the rotational inertia = quicker change of direction for a given input or more traction at the front wheels for a given spped of chance.
Adding a connection between the two shock towers is adding a connection between the top mounts of the king pins of the steering = more exact directional movement this control.
I did both ;)
among other things ofcourse: I found that the TRD bars to the lower rear suspension arms did a lót to the handling. It made turning natably more taut and the more undualting the surface the more notable. Véry confidence inspiring because of increased feedback in the bum.
Now that latter only makes sense with more supportive seats like fitting buckets.
The betters upport also makes you can use your hands for steering only; have no steering inputs from body movement nor (consciously or sunconsciously) holding on to the steering wheel.
Properly fitting, supporting, (bucket) seats thus do a lót for the handling of the car.
As they are a good weight saving too I´d say the are quite high on the list of effective mods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Not really much if you want a reclining seat.
Hence I wrote buckets ;)

I chose to leave a fair bit of kilos on the table because I opted for twó sets of OEM rails/basis. One from a LHD and the other from a RHD.
This way both buckets are still sliding and adjustable in inclination. The latter makes for fine adjustment whereas the former is also very practical for use of the space behind them. It after all still is my daily for use in charming company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
I have the car pretty well sorted as I like it. Most would call it twitchy.

Ok, I jump at putting a supercharger on giving a bit more grunt and 30 horses but that is not on the books here because of homologation.

Lighter hood, rear lid, plastic windscreen are on the backburner for when something would appear affordably within the EU.

For the moment though it is repairing galore; total engine rebuild and parking damage repair.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
My engineering judgement is that the rear crash bar adds significantly to the overall chassis torsional stiffness, just like the rungs in a ladder add torsional stiffness to a ladder.

Dave
I am still on the fence whether the rear one has any benificial effect in chassis stiffness, hence I left it in place. Just shaved the outer sides off and took minimal material from the inside flat (see the stiffness of the fitting to the rails).
As you could have seen, I wrote about the front one. Have taken thát one off.
Placed photos of the frónt off, the rear in situ ;)

This observed, the crash bars are nót an integral part of the special steel chassis.
You can find that illustrated in the chassis drawings.
This stands to reason as they are meant to deform relatively easily and in the process absorb energy. Thus neither are they all that sturdily fixed to the chassis rails. The nuts only hold one flat of the bar and that, agaín, is designed to be relatively nót rigid.
In mý structural engineering knowledge the crash bars are like using thin screws to fit a pvc tube to the outer ends of your ladder :geek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
As mentioned time and again by humorists in EVERY thread about weight saving, I dó watch my own weight as well.
Apart from simply for healtht living, for weight ánd for the fit in thus feedback through the buckets.

This weekend was spoiled rotten for my birthday. Two gfs so twíce spoiled rotten and also in at léast subconscious spoiling competition. Yes they gave extra excersize as well but the food part won without a doubt :ROFLMAO:

No harm done though as the car will not be ready in a week and by then I will have undone the ´damage´ (y)

p.s. down on the Friday weight already :p As there is quìte some leeway in the green BMI zone, best keep that momentum going a bit.
The lighweight flywheel arrived too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
I agree that the front crash bar has a lower effect on chassis torsional stiffness than the rear, but I still judge that it is significant. Try this: jack up one corner of the car (with the beam removed) and see if the 3 studs on each side still line up with the holes in the crash bar.

Dave
One: Be aware that you test is flawed. You are taking out any flex of the bar/fitting when mounted out of the equasion.

Two: I did it properly and actually méasured chassis flex as a matter of course for other things and my argument was underlined; the front crash bar and fittings are too flexible to make a difference.
At the rear the overhang of the chassis rails is too short to see any difference.

On a side note, the front strut brace made hardly if any any difference either. Boris´ front lower member brace díd. Note mine is a PFL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Ehhh, speaking as an engineer (electrical but took mechanical too. It looks like the front bar is a small sheer plane. I would expect it to provide some slight additional resistance to both yaw and pitch. Far more than the rear anyway.
Better measure than opinions based on suppositions no?!

I did some véry simple, bsisc non laser accurate ´chassis´ torsion measurements with Snelbaard´s belly plate vs. OEM, his FMB, with/without front strut brace, with/without front crash bar (was taking it off ányway ánd did not think of slacking the nuts on one end). The only one I did not are Dev´s door spacers.
Jack up one front corner and measure the hight under the opposite side tyre.
I found the differences negligible. Yes, all gave a difference but if not for the consistency it could easily have been within human measurement error.

With all said and done I would like to point out that our Spyder in OEM guise is not a floppy thing AT ALL.
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top