Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New MCM series - 11sec subaru build. Bald PFer content.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Fuck yeah, that'll be a weapon.
    LS Powered FD3S RX7

    Comment


      Compliance data, the 6 cyl cars for 1988 on were under a different compliance number. The 4 cyl car weights are much lower. In fact from memory none of the 4 bangers clear the magic 1100kg mark.

      Given what I have seen over the years, most wouldn't let that stop them but it is the legit answer to the question.

      Comment


        From the Gingerbeers i have talked to, it doesnt matter. Its the heaviest weight for the chassis in that era.
        Chris
        ------
        The new nugget
        I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself. A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough without ever having felt sorry for itself. - D.H.Lawrence

        Comment


          yep, triumph 2000 uses a different compliance number to a 2500, yet either can and has been engineered for a ls swap - both weigh similar, yet the 2000 should fall below the allowable. it goes on heaviest model.
          same with volvo 240's, early 244 2 door cars are around 1030kg, late sedans are 1300kg.
          I'M NOT A HOOKER BUT 20 BUCKS IS 20 BUCKS...

          I am junkie for swedish high quality shitboxes. my latest fix is this...

          robslothyoung - follow me on insta.

          Comment


            If you can find heavier weight published for a car can you use that against RMS if they have a lower weight?
            an easy fix is get a mate to drive in front of you at 60 then 80 then 100 and mark in on your speedo with some liquid paper.

            Comment


              Originally posted by takai View Post
              From the Gingerbeers i have talked to, it doesnt matter. Its the heaviest weight for the chassis in that era.
              I am a VSCCS engineer and it does matter but most people turn a blind eye.

              It is based on the heaviest tare weight for a sedan without optional extras. The RMS RVDS has all the compliance data so the info is readily accessible.
              Last edited by CA18escort; 10-11-20, 11:31 AM.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Sloth View Post
                yep, triumph 2000 uses a different compliance number to a 2500, yet either can and has been engineered for a ls swap - both weigh similar, yet the 2000 should fall below the allowable. it goes on heaviest model.
                same with volvo 240's, early 244 2 door cars are around 1030kg, late sedans are 1300kg.
                Compliance data for both the 2000 and 2500 is 1170kg tare which gives 5850cc NA motor.

                Also listed tare weight for 1975 244 2 door is 1220kg Heaviest sedan was the 1984 on 244GLEA 4 door at 1310kg due to all the electrics. The GLA for the same year was 1260kg so fuck all in it.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by gtrboyy View Post
                  If you can find heavier weight published for a car can you use that against RMS if they have a lower weight?
                  It would have to be in a relevant technical publication. Wiki doesn't cut it and it is difficult to get it over the line. Think 308 in an LJ Torana. It misses out by 4 kg as tare weight is listed as 1096kg.

                  Comment


                    I thought they mentioned it to be a 1989 320i which was a 6 right?

                    Comment


                      Terry Bebbington who wrote Holden books '45 Years of Holdens' or one of his other publications I think had lc xu1 as heaviest torana...some dudes in Vic used there torries passed for 5.3/327.

                      If I can find the book & it has where technocal information came from is that enough to use the highest weight published?

                      If can't go 5.3 does 304ci scrape in?
                      an easy fix is get a mate to drive in front of you at 60 then 80 then 100 and mark in on your speedo with some liquid paper.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by TT View Post
                        I thought they mentioned it to be a 1989 320i which was a 6 right?
                        yes.

                        I am pretty sure.
                        .... because every driver experiences the destructive potential of the effortless surge of power available through the smallest of body movements.

                        Dr Hoon
                        .

                        DrNick is king!!!! No, Mark Webber is now! Long live the king!... hold on a minute mate, Ricci is in charge now

                        Comment


                          I would like to find Harry and punch him. Less MCM episodes, HELL NO!

                          I have loved the extra episodes.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by gtrboyy View Post
                            Terry Bebbington who wrote Holden books '45 Years of Holdens' or one of his other publications I think had lc xu1 as heaviest torana...some dudes in Vic used there torries passed for 5.3/327.

                            If I can find the book & it has where technocal information came from is that enough to use the highest weight published?

                            If can't go 5.3 does 304ci scrape in?
                            Biggest issue is the 1100kg magic number.

                            1099kg = 3000cc turbo or 4396cc NA
                            1100kg = 3300cc turbo or 5500cc NA

                            Because it isn't a sliding scale there is a a step jump at 1100kg. This is biggest issue because the LJ XU-1 was listed as 1099.6 kg kerb weight on the paperwork. Most websites to tend to round up but....

                            The LC was only 1013.3kg because 186 vs 202.
                            Last edited by CA18escort; 10-11-20, 08:22 PM.

                            Comment


                              Click image for larger version

Name:	1988 320i compliance data sheet..jpg
Views:	329
Size:	1.53 MB
ID:	7196593
                              Originally posted by TT View Post
                              I thought they mentioned it to be a 1989 320i which was a 6 right?
                              And after much digging I have the supporting evidence 5900cc NA on the button.


                              Comment


                                Thanks for getting the right answer! Can you not add the options to get the weight up a bit? Still can’t get to LS3 but close (love the L98!)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X