Sports cars vs sedans: heavy!

#11

John Smith wrote:

Quote:

I saw a red Bently Continental GT the other day, it was pretty sweet
looking, and I think heavy.. Come on lotto... I would get one for my wife!

They're very pretty, in a very Bentley kind of a way. But I can't help
thinking they missed a huge trick in using the Phaeton platform and not
re-engineering for aluminium and using the A8.

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

#12

"Fritz" <soberfritz (AT) yahoo (DOT) comREMOVE> wrote

Quote:

ray o'hara wrote:
brafield (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:1127933066.825749.17220 (AT) g49g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com...

Trivia sifted from a recent Road & Track, but I'd like to hear more
examples.

The teeny Honda S2000 2-seater sports is heavier than Honda's 4-door
5-seat Civic sedan.

Lamborgini's open 2-seater Murcielago is heavier than Mercedes' biggest
S-class 4-door 5-seater luxo-barge --- duh?

Does anyone know of other "fat" sports and GT cars?

I recall that Gordon Murray required the stereo supplier to halve their
audio gear's weight before he'd accept it for the McLaren GT --- those
days have gone!

vettes whre the 2nd heaviest car chevy makes. {not including SUVs}
sports cars tend to be weighty don't they.

Front wheel drive cars don't need as many parts. My old Chebby Corsica
was light as a feather, and quick as hell from 0 to 30. Hard to believe
the vette is that heavy? Love it or hate it, the Corvette can't be beat
unless you spend far more then double it's price.

Can't beat in what way?

Quote:

--
Fritz

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over
and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the
propaganda."- President George W. Bush

#13

"Lloyd Parker" <lparker (AT) emory (DOT) edu> wrote

Quote:

In article <keGdnaZA6LAnzabeRVn-hA (AT) comcast (DOT) com>, "JH" <JH (AT) yahoo (DOT) com
wrote:

vettes whre the 2nd heaviest car chevy makes. {not including SUVs}
sports cars tend to be weighty don't they.

Huh? Rubbish.

Monte Carlo- 3411 lbs (3511 for the SS with the big engine)
Impala- 3555 - 3709
Cobalt 4dr - 3216
Malibu Maxx - 3174-3620 base stipper- model to Maxx loaded model

Corvette - 3170

The C6 is lighter than EVERY passenger car they make save for the
sub-compact Aveo and 2-dr Cobalt. This is true even without considering
the
even-lighter Z06.

Nice fact-checking. There's so much expertise around here...

What about the convertible Vette? 3711 lb.

Try 3199 lbs. Where do you get your facts????

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/...onvertible.asp

Steve

#14

Lloyd Parker wrote:

Quote:

That's not true. From www.edmunds.com -- Lambo Mur. roadster -- 3638 lb;
Mercedes S430 -- 4160 lb.
snip
I can think of 2 reasons for heavy:

1. Open cars (especially ones made from coupes, not engineered as open cars)
need lots of structural reinforcement.
2. AWD adds weight.

There's also bound to be a weight difference between a 6.2l Lambo engine
and a 4.3l Merc engine.

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

#15

Phil Newnham wrote:

Quote:

Lloyd Parker wrote:

That's not true. From www.edmunds.com -- Lambo Mur. roadster -- 3638
lb; Mercedes S430 -- 4160 lb.

snip

I can think of 2 reasons for heavy:

1. Open cars (especially ones made from coupes, not engineered as open
cars) need lots of structural reinforcement.
2. AWD adds weight.

There's also bound to be a weight difference between a 6.2l Lambo engine
and a 4.3l Merc engine.

Why? Bigger cylinder bores remove a lot of cast iron, so engines should
be lighter ;o)
Doc

Quote:

#16

Doc Knutsen wrote:

Quote:

Phil Newnham wrote:

There's also bound to be a weight difference between a 6.2l Lambo
engine and a 4.3l Merc engine.

Why? Bigger cylinder bores remove a lot of cast iron, so engines should
be lighter ;o)

I said weight *difference*

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

#17

In article <X_6dnc0EscTo3KHeRVn-vw (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"Steven de Mena" <steve (AT) stevedemena (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

"Lloyd Parker" <lparker (AT) emory (DOT) edu> wrote in message
news:dhguu2$ol7$2 (AT) leto (DOT) cc.emory.edu...
In article <keGdnaZA6LAnzabeRVn-hA (AT) comcast (DOT) com>, "JH" <JH (AT) yahoo (DOT) com
wrote:

vettes whre the 2nd heaviest car chevy makes. {not including SUVs}
sports cars tend to be weighty don't they.

Huh? Rubbish.

Monte Carlo- 3411 lbs (3511 for the SS with the big engine)
Impala- 3555 - 3709
Cobalt 4dr - 3216
Malibu Maxx - 3174-3620 base stipper- model to Maxx loaded model

Corvette - 3170

The C6 is lighter than EVERY passenger car they make save for the
sub-compact Aveo and 2-dr Cobalt. This is true even without considering
the
even-lighter Z06.

Nice fact-checking. There's so much expertise around here...

What about the convertible Vette? 3711 lb.

Try 3199 lbs. Where do you get your facts????

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/...onvertible.asp

Steve

www.edmunds.com

#18

"Fritz" <soberfritz (AT) yahoo (DOT) comREMOVE> wrote

Quote:

ray o'hara wrote:
brafield (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:1127933066.825749.17220 (AT) g49g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com...

Trivia sifted from a recent Road & Track, but I'd like to hear more
examples.

The teeny Honda S2000 2-seater sports is heavier than Honda's 4-door
5-seat Civic sedan.

Lamborgini's open 2-seater Murcielago is heavier than Mercedes' biggest
S-class 4-door 5-seater luxo-barge --- duh?

Does anyone know of other "fat" sports and GT cars?

I recall that Gordon Murray required the stereo supplier to halve their
audio gear's weight before he'd accept it for the McLaren GT --- those
days have gone!

vettes whre the 2nd heaviest car chevy makes. {not including SUVs}
sports cars tend to be weighty don't they.

Front wheel drive cars don't need as many parts. My old Chebby Corsica
was light as a feather, and quick as hell from 0 to 30. Hard to believe
the vette is that heavy? Love it or hate it, the Corvette can't be beat
unless you spend far more then double it's price.

I know of a few million cheap motor cycles that will blow its door off for
1/10th the cost

My last bike did 0-100 kph in under 3 seconds.... you could strap nitrous
and a blower to that vette, it would still be looking at the bikes
taillight..

#19

F1ST wrote:

Quote:

I know of a few million cheap motor cycles that will blow its door off for
1/10th the cost

My last bike did 0-100 kph in under 3 seconds.... you could strap nitrous
and a blower to that vette, it would still be looking at the bikes
taillight..

All the way to the first sharp corner

Although... do Corvettes
actually handle these days or are they still rubbish?

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

#20

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:38:58 +0100, Phil Newnham <pnewnham (AT) yahoo (DOT) com>
wrote:

Quote:

Doc Knutsen wrote:

Phil Newnham wrote:

There's also bound to be a weight difference between a 6.2l Lambo
engine and a 4.3l Merc engine.

Why? Bigger cylinder bores remove a lot of cast iron, so engines should
be lighter ;o)

I said weight *difference*

They come with balls in the boot to match the extended dicks ? ;-)

--

Regards, Frank

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Sports cars vs sedans: heavy!

Formula 1 Formula 1 motor racing discusions (rec.autos.sport.f1)

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-29-2005 , 09:21 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-29-2005 , 10:18 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-29-2005 , 03:33 PM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 05:40 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 06:30 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 06:38 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 07:17 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 08:24 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 08:55 AM

Re: Sports cars vs sedans: heavy! - 09-30-2005 , 09:58 AM