I for one, would like to see some pictures of the OP’s 2380 pound C3.
You know our saying here on the forum.

 

You guys just won’t believe anything.

Lightweight headlights

Lightweight fenders

Lightweight bumpers

 

I always make myself laugh!

Let’s start with this. I removed the whole dash and firewall. Firewall and floor is aluminum. The panel over the transmission comes off. Chromoly very light steering shaft . Turn signal and key switch are Honda , module controls lighting. Kirkey lightweight seat. Wiper is only there for looks to pass inspection there is absolutely no mechanism. Ever piece of the emergency brake is remover including grinding off any tabs , backing plates, cables. The pull Handel is there for looks.

 

That’s right wilwood makes a super light caliper with aluminum hat and thin drilled rotor. I’m not stopping a tank just a light car.

I’m even conscious of how much a tire weighs aluminum lug nuts aluminum weight jacks , hubs and spindles.

 

Just so you understand my theory

 

Funny thing about AI: the more one knows about it, the less one trusts it.

But since you trust it, lets see what google has to say:



Which one is right? Those of us who've taken a high school physics class know*.

*And for the record, my education and professional experience go WAY beyond that. But that's all that is necessary to understand this very basic concept.

 

There is a LOT of inaccurate information on the internet.
And yet some of it is very good.

All I can say is "consider your source"

Where do those quotes really come from?

I did not have to look to hard to find this:

 

Why are we talking about center of gravity when I’m talking about rear percentage? You might be a little too educated to understand my thinking. Say you have a 10ft long board. And you put 50lb on the nose and 50lb in the middle and 50lb on the rear. 3 ft from front you put a saw horse under it. Now you put another saw horse 3 ft from the back. As you move that rear saw horse closer to center you will gain weight on rear saw horse and loose it on the front saw horse. Yes the tire is on the ground but it is connected to the coil spring which is pushing on frame.

 

They came down and did some racing with us. His son competed for about two years in the nascar modifieds
true story I swear to god. I feel like I’m talking to bob all over again. Very very educated I gave them everything in my setup because they had purchased the same chassis as mine and since I was in a house car the condition was I shared with customers that bought there cars. Everything minus the simple details. They were fun to beat and eventually gave up. Beat Kurt Busch in an open comp race at the bull ring in Las Vegas , Randy Lajoy in California. Ron Hornaday beat me 3 times and I spanked him 2 times. It would have been the other way around but a restart he got under me and drove me up where I had to lift or crash. Still pissed about that.

 

I guess be educated you might try and pull one over on me. I’ll except apologies i’m never shy when I make a mistake.

 

 

Why are we talking about center of gravity? What, exactly, do you think causes the load on the tire? What do you think "rear percentage" is? Its literally measuring center of gravity of the car.

Bud, you don't even know how center of gravity affects "rear percentage". Your theory is that the person who does this sort of thing for a living is wrong, but you, who needs to use AI to get an answer, is right?

The problem with your example is that the saw horses represent the tires here. Not the springs. You need a second level of saw horses to represent the springs. Because the springs don't touch the ground.

And what you continually forget is that the spring is NOT connected to the tire. It is connected to the trailing arm. Which is connected to the frame and tire. Take away the frame attachment point and what happens to the trailing arm?

What holds up the front part of the frame? The tire. What holds up the rear part of the trailing arm? The tire. ALL LOADS GO TO THE TIRES. It has to because that is the only thing holding the car up.Otherwise your frame is laying on the ground.

I've attached a simplified example with all of the math proving tire load doesn't change, even when you drastically move the spring around. This is a simplified version of the Corvette frame/suspension - only in one dimension. I've drastically stretched the trailing arm to allow you to put that spring WAY farther forward than you ever could in a real car. For the purposes of this, we're also going to say that we have ballast weights to put in the other spring mounting location so that no weight is ever shifted on the car itself. Only the spring location changes. If you can follow the math, you'll see the spring loads absolutely change, but are ENTIRELY counteracted by the load where the trailing arm mounts to the frame. You'll also notice the loads are drastically higher the further forward you mount that spring, and that WILL require a more robust structure to handle it (increasing weight).

I'll take your apology anytime. The math doesn't lie, and physics doesn't care if you believe in it or not - it works either way.

 

You’re really good at talking down to people . Never said I need AI and I don’t for common sense. Please keep your insults off my post.

 

I do this for a living on things that have a MUCH higher chance of death or injury than a backyard mechanic's toy. You're the one who can't take a hint that you're in over your head and do not know what you're talking about. I will eat every single word if you can point to a single error in my analysis. But you can't. Because you don't understand a damned thing I did in there.

 

Well your wrong and i know countless people including chassis builders that disagree with you . Plus I have scales and way more experience and I've never worked in my back yard . Come on over and bring 5k if your so sure otherwise you know what to do with your theory's keyboard guy.
also, who said I was attached to the trailing arm see that's what happens when you assume.

 

I’m not sure how your asking the question.

 

Statement above still stands. Turns out you can't argue the theory if you don't understand the theory to begin with.

 

If you all are just messing with me that’s cool. Cheers

 

Click click click oh I completely understand.

 

Hey y'all let's take things down a notch. At the end of the day we all like Corvettes.

AZSTAR's car is most likely faster than any of ours. I know my car wouldn't stand a chance against that monster. I would like to learn more about it even though, no offense, there's a basic misunderstanding of engineering principles when it comes to weight distribution. That doesn't mean it's not fast or there's not other things to learn about.

We've all said our piece so let's stop arguing with strangers on the internet and go back to talking about going fast. You know we're all real engineers because we're so bad at communicating our thoughts :P