Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online!
Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! 
-
Latest | 0 Rplys
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Car Comparisons
Car Comparisons Compare any cars and find out what every body else thinks. Just refrain from making stupid comparos like Viper vs. Geo Metro :)
Reply Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Email this Page Email this Page | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-25-2003, 05:01 PM   #61
Deakins
AF Enthusiast
 
Deakins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Aalesund
Posts: 1,879
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by FYRHWK1
There is no one perfect weight distribution, however a 50:50 distribution offers the best compromise between loading during braking and acceleration. Go ahead and prove that the 360 benefits from its rear heavy design.
There is a bit of difference between static and dynamic balance.
Where do you want the weight while accelerating? Over the rear wheels right?
And where do you want it while breaking? Right again, 50% at the rear, and the other 50% at the front. It doesn't take a genious to figure out a rear heavy design will achieve better dynamic balance.
A mid engined car, like the 360, will also have more mass closer to the CG.

Quote:
It's more to do with the fact that I have more automotive knowledge in my left testicle then the collective european magazines that sets me off. If they could drop their bias and ease up on the dash grabbing, and attend a few automotive schools, I might care what they bleated out.
So how many European languages do you speak?
__________________
The ringing of the division bell, have stopped...
AF User Guidelines
Deakins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2003, 05:35 PM   #62
FYRHWK1
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to FYRHWK1
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deakins
There is a bit of difference between static and dynamic balance.
Where do you want the weight while accelerating? Over the rear wheels right?
And where do you want it while breaking? Right again, 50% at the rear, and the other 50% at the front. It doesn't take a genious to figure out a rear heavy design will achieve better dynamic balance.
A mid engined car, like the 360, will also have more mass closer to the CG.


So how many European languages do you speak?
having a static 50/50 balance is superior because of the effects of movement. You want the weight on the front wheels during braking and the rears during acceleration, how much depends on your setup and needs, a rear heavy desing is still going to want to lose the tail while entering a turn hard because of the extra lateral load placed on the rear tires.

You've no clue how far back the Z06's engine is placed in regards to it's CoG, there are many front engine designs which place the engine plenty far back in the chassis, and obviuosly the Z06's motor is fine just where it is.

None, actually.
FYRHWK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2003, 06:21 PM   #63
Sexy beast
Banned
 
Sexy beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Those Corvettes are such a piece of shit. I was drag racing one the other day and as soon as we got to 100mph his tail panel flew right off...that was so funny watching that cheesy plastic tail tumbling down the highway...what a piece of shit.
Sexy beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2003, 01:08 PM   #64
Kurtdg19
AF Enthusiast
 
Kurtdg19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 739
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Kurtdg19
Well as far as this goes I haven't seen any evidence that would put the Modena on top as far as comparing these two on the track. Considering that everyone is so into the 'ring', the best time I could find for the 360 was an 8:09. The Z06 has completed this track in a sub 8 minute time (7:56). Other than that, I couldn't find any side by side comparison of the two. If anybody has a legit comparison between the two, be sure to post it. Now all in all we really can't state which is the better car, but we'll always be entitled to our opinions.

But I do not see how a static balance can be better than a dynamic balance. For instance if you were to balance your wheels, a static balance will correct the up/down bouncing of your wheels, whereas when your dynamically balanced, you've not only balanced the up.down bouncing of the wheels, but you've also balanced the side/side wobble of the wheels which can easily be detected by the shake of your steering wheel. Can you explain to me why it is better to be static balanced vs. a dynamic balance.
Kurtdg19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2003, 03:01 PM   #65
OoNismoO
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 265
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
50/50 weight distribution will help you yes, but it also depends on where most of the weight is spread out, and suspension geometry and tuning. like a car with most of its weight in the middle has low inertia, look at f1 cars, they try to put all the weight near the center to help it go around a corner better. the z06 does have its engine pretty far back, and its transmission in front of the rear axle, so it does have a lot of its weight near the center, but the 360 has more of its engine and transmission near the center since its a midengined car, so it should have less inertia than the vette. i wouldnt call the modena a rear heavy car, its weight distribution isnt that far off, a porsche 911 would be considered a rear heavy car, but it still handles really good cause of good suspension tuning, and design. if you have most of the weight near the center of your vehicle it also helps braking, and acceleration.

Last edited by OoNismoO; 11-26-2003 at 03:34 PM.
OoNismoO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2003, 06:43 PM   #66
FYRHWK1
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to FYRHWK1
Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtdg19
But I do not see how a static balance can be better than a dynamic balance. For instance if you were to balance your wheels, a static balance will correct the up/down bouncing of your wheels, whereas when your dynamically balanced, you've not only balanced the up.down bouncing of the wheels, but you've also balanced the side/side wobble of the wheels which can easily be detected by the shake of your steering wheel. Can you explain to me why it is better to be static balanced vs. a dynamic balance.
Nobody is saying either balance is better, one cant be better then another, and we're not talking tire balance. It's the cars weight distribution over the front and rear tires.

nismo, less inertia? inertia is dependant on speed and weight, you can't say one car has less inertia then another because it changes with speed and even with losing weight through burning gas. Also, how could having the weight near the center help acceleration? except for traction (and having the weight near the front or back will help with traction, not near the center) weight placement has no effect on either.
FYRHWK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2003, 07:27 PM   #67
OoNismoO
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 265
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by FYRHWK1
Nobody is saying either balance is better, one cant be better then another, and we're not talking tire balance. It's the cars weight distribution over the front and rear tires.

nismo, less inertia? inertia is dependant on speed and weight, you can't say one car has less inertia then another because it changes with speed and even with losing weight through burning gas. Also, how could having the weight near the center help acceleration? except for traction (and having the weight near the front or back will help with traction, not near the center) weight placement has no effect on either.
lol... man,you take pyhsics at all? why dont you go learn about it. with most of the weight near the center, you basically get the best balance of acceleration, stopping, and turning. yea the corvette has good balance of 50/50 front to rear, but im saying by having more of the weight near the center with 50/50 front to rear, or near it, you get better steering response, and helps the car turn better. think of a stick with weights at the end, campared to a stick with more of its weight at the center, both 50/50 distribution. the one with more of the weight near the center will be easier to turn, or spin, than the one with the wieights at the end. think of both of them going in a straight line, then suddenly turning, the one with more weights near the center should change directions easier.

Last edited by OoNismoO; 11-26-2003 at 08:04 PM.
OoNismoO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2003, 07:53 PM   #68
flylwsi
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 4,347
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to flylwsi
Re: z06 vs modena

i can't believe i just went through this thread...
it's loosely veiled as a vette vs. ferrari thread, but there's so much extra...

so much of this trying to disprove someone's sources or definitions.

amazing.

i'm so sad i didn't get into this thread when it got started...
i'm so the life of these types of parties...
and i know poly knows that..
flylwsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 12:49 AM   #69
FYRHWK1
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to FYRHWK1
Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by OoNismoO
lol... man,you take pyhsics at all? why dont you go learn about it. with most of the weight near the center, you basically get the best balance of acceleration, stopping, and turning. yea the corvette has good balance of 50/50 front to rear, but im saying by having more of the weight near the center with 50/50 front to rear, or near it, you get better steering response, and helps the car turn better. think of a stick with weights at the end, campared to a stick with more of its weight at the center, both 50/50 distribution. the one with more of the weight near the center will be easier to turn, or spin, than the one with the wieights at the end. think of both of them going in a straight line, then suddenly turning, the one with more weights near the center should change directions easier.
Perhaps you should take your own advice before making any comments.

You claimed the 360 would "have less inertia" and ended your sentence, you obviously dont understand inertia so I simply stated what you couldn't, that you cannot claim there is less ninertia anywhere because you do not have the speed at which they are moving, nobody does, it's constantly variable.

You get better steering response? if the wheels turn, and the car does not break traction, your car will turn as fast as you crank the wheel over, thats all there is to it. Having less weight to rotate around the center means it places less stress on the tires as they're turning, which is what you're blindly attempting to say, but it also means that there is less weight on those wheels, and weight is what gives you traction. So what helps a car turn better is properly loading all of the tires and not overcoming their grip, whether you do this with a front engine design or mid, it doesnt matter. Unless you're running a race bred car, sticking the engine in the middle behind the cabin won't give you all the magical gains you believe it will.

As for the sticks, your analogy is fairly good at describing inertia, too bad it doesn't take into account for a tires traction as well. besides that, the 360's drivetrain is not directly in the center either, it has a large amount directly above, or nearly above, the rear axle, making it a rear heavy car. Not so bad as a Porsche, but it is far from rotating evenly. The front has little traction due to the drivetrain being in the rear and the rear is loaded with weight. The Z06 places the engine up front centered at the front axle, and the gas tank & transmission at the rear, so instead of it all at the rear, there's only the transmission and tank, as to which setup has the mass placed further from the CoG, I don't know, but I'd much rather have it distributed across the whole car instead of being all placed in the ass.
FYRHWK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 01:59 AM   #70
OoNismoO
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 265
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by FYRHWK1
Perhaps you should take your own advice before making any comments.

You claimed the 360 would "have less inertia" and ended your sentence, you obviously dont understand inertia so I simply stated what you couldn't, that you cannot claim there is less ninertia anywhere because you do not have the speed at which they are moving, nobody does, it's constantly variable.

You get better steering response? if the wheels turn, and the car does not break traction, your car will turn as fast as you crank the wheel over, thats all there is to it. Having less weight to rotate around the center means it places less stress on the tires as they're turning, which is what you're blindly attempting to say, but it also means that there is less weight on those wheels, and weight is what gives you traction. So what helps a car turn better is properly loading all of the tires and not overcoming their grip, whether you do this with a front engine design or mid, it doesnt matter. Unless you're running a race bred car, sticking the engine in the middle behind the cabin won't give you all the magical gains you believe it will.

As for the sticks, your analogy is fairly good at describing inertia, too bad it doesn't take into account for a tires traction as well. besides that, the 360's drivetrain is not directly in the center either, it has a large amount directly above, or nearly above, the rear axle, making it a rear heavy car. Not so bad as a Porsche, but it is far from rotating evenly. The front has little traction due to the drivetrain being in the rear and the rear is loaded with weight. The Z06 places the engine up front centered at the front axle, and the gas tank & transmission at the rear, so instead of it all at the rear, there's only the transmission and tank, as to which setup has the mass placed further from the CoG, I don't know, but I'd much rather have it distributed across the whole car instead of being all placed in the ass.
if you read my post again, i said it "should" have less inertia. you seem to think that im trying to compare a 360 to a z06, i did at first, but on my last post i was comparing a car with more of its weight near the center, to a car with its weight spread further apart.

as for inertia, and that weight over tires comment... do you know how to think?? how old are you? or are you not very smart? seriously, think about what you said. im not making this stuff up, go ahead and look up some info on it, or read some books about it. what you just said about no weight on top of the tires makes no sense, cause that would mean a front heavy car would oversteer based off your reasonings, cause omg, it would have insane amouts of grip with all that weight on top. it sounds retarded if you ask me. didnt you just say the cars constantly variable? did you forget the cars moving when cornering? have you ever thought about when you start turning hard, all the weight goes to the outside tires, usually most of the weight shifts to the front right tire when taking a hard left turn. if theres too much weight over the front, it will likely understeer when you overload the tires gripping limit. like i said, really think about it.

Last edited by OoNismoO; 11-27-2003 at 02:39 AM.
OoNismoO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 10:35 AM   #71
Kurtdg19
AF Enthusiast
 
Kurtdg19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 739
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Kurtdg19
A front heavy car can still turn just as good any other car. Look at the skyline for instance, its a front heavy car, but it seems to handle very well in turns. Having more weight to your vehicle means you only need a greater force to make the car follow the curve.

Ex.
If you have two cars enter a curve, one is heavier and other is lighter, which car will most likely end up at the outside of the track? Either, the weight is only one determining variable in this concept.

For both cars to make the turn at the same speed each car will require the same force per pound of mass. This means the heavier car will need a greater force to follow the curve the same as the lighter car. The force provided by the (static) friction between the tires and the road surface given that the frictional force is proportion to the weight of the car will make the extra mass cancel out. This will allow the heavier car to corner just as well as the lighter car.

A heavier (more massive) car will have more inertia, so you will need to have a greater force to negotiate turns. It's not impossible, its only another variable that needs to be accounted for. I think that is what fyrhwk was going for with accounting the traction of your tires in inertia, because its a big factor.
Kurtdg19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 12:49 PM   #72
FYRHWK1
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to FYRHWK1
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by OoNismoO
if you read my post again, i said it "should" have less inertia. you seem to think that im trying to compare a 360 to a z06, i did at first, but on my last post i was comparing a car with more of its weight near the center, to a car with its weight spread further apart.

as for inertia, and that weight over tires comment... do you know how to think?? how old are you? or are you not very smart? seriously, think about what you said. im not making this stuff up, go ahead and look up some info on it, or read some books about it. what you just said about no weight on top of the tires makes no sense, cause that would mean a front heavy car would oversteer based off your reasonings, cause omg, it would have insane amouts of grip with all that weight on top. it sounds retarded if you ask me. didnt you just say the cars constantly variable? did you forget the cars moving when cornering? have you ever thought about when you start turning hard, all the weight goes to the outside tires, usually most of the weight shifts to the front right tire when taking a hard left turn. if theres too much weight over the front, it will likely understeer when you overload the tires gripping limit. like i said, really think about it.
I find it funny how the less educated of us here is the one throwing the insults around, especially about how much either of us knows.

You obviously don't understand where traction comes from so I won't be continuing any further then this. Have you ever ridden in a pickup truck driven hard? If so you'd know that when braking hard the rear end gets unloaded, which causes a severe lack of traction for the rear tires. Now since you won't be able to figure this out, I'll tell you why that is, there's less WEIGHT on the rear axle. The same goes for a high powered car coming off the line,weight transfer takes WEIGHT, a vital part of traction, away from the tires. If you don't know this simple fact then I don't know why you're trying to argue this point.

For your information, FWD cars DO have oversteer problems, as well as having too much of their weight on the front tires, which overloads them while entering a turn. It sounds to me like you're trying to say that the front wheels dont have more traction then the rears, hopefully you wouldn't say something that stupid.

What do you know, at least you get the fact that weight transfer to the outside tires happens during a turn, I'm glad for that much. Perhaps the outside front tire will be overloaded, or perhaps it will have enough traction to handle the lateral load because of the weight above it, which is the case with the front engine car here.
FYRHWK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 04:05 PM   #73
flylwsi
AF Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 4,347
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to flylwsi
Re: z06 vs modena

i'm amazed at the amount of theory that's going back and forth here.. i'm honestly impressed...

this thread has gone off topic in a positive direction (for once)

so what's the verdict on the incomparable cars here?

price tag distinguishes...

if you want an "inexpensive" fast car, you get the zo6.
if you want the car that has the "bling" factor with it's price tag, get the ferrari.

if you get the ferrari, you also get the 12000 dollar service fees when you get simple parts replaced, and that's no joke.

in that event, i'll take the zo6, b/c i'd be driving the car daily.

and this, of course, has nothing to do with the deep theory and performance of the cars, but it's all about practicality for me...

doug hayashi, from www.nsxfiles.com has some horror stories for pricing on getting his ferrari serviced...

i'll stick to the car that can be repaired with parts from autozone (not that i'd buy them there, but you know what i mean)
flylwsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2003, 05:00 PM   #74
OoNismoO
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 265
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by FYRHWK1
I find it funny how the less educated of us here is the one throwing the insults around, especially about how much either of us knows.

You obviously don't understand where traction comes from so I won't be continuing any further then this. Have you ever ridden in a pickup truck driven hard? If so you'd know that when braking hard the rear end gets unloaded, which causes a severe lack of traction for the rear tires. Now since you won't be able to figure this out, I'll tell you why that is, there's less WEIGHT on the rear axle. The same goes for a high powered car coming off the line,weight transfer takes WEIGHT, a vital part of traction, away from the tires. If you don't know this simple fact then I don't know why you're trying to argue this point.

For your information, FWD cars DO have oversteer problems, as well as having too much of their weight on the front tires, which overloads them while entering a turn. It sounds to me like you're trying to say that the front wheels dont have more traction then the rears, hopefully you wouldn't say something that stupid.

What do you know, at least you get the fact that weight transfer to the outside tires happens during a turn, I'm glad for that much. Perhaps the outside front tire will be overloaded, or perhaps it will have enough traction to handle the lateral load because of the weight above it, which is the case with the front engine car here.
i know what im talking about, do you? i never said fwd, or nose heavy cars will never oversteer. what you said about weights over the tires is that the more wieght you have, the more traction, which isnt true, cause you will eventually reach the tires gripping limit, and make it lose traction, you see what im saying? lets get back to what my original point was. lets say you had two cars that weigh the same, and one has weights at the end, the other has weights in the middle, both 50/50 balance, do you think they have the same amount of weight on top of the tires? which one should have less inertia through turns? which one should slalom better? now you re trying to explain it a little differently by talking about braking really hard, ok lets talk about it then. yea the weight shifts to the front, and cause the rear to have less traction, but when you reach the tires gripping limit, usually thats understeer in a front heavy car, oversteer for rear biased cars, or the car just slides sideways. thats why its better to brake in a straight line when goin fast or braking hard. im glad you understood at least some of what i said, but i feel that you dont completely understand that inertia thing, or what im trying to say to you about weights in the middle compared to weights at the end.

Last edited by OoNismoO; 11-27-2003 at 05:32 PM.
OoNismoO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2003, 07:07 PM   #75
Deakins
AF Enthusiast
 
Deakins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Aalesund
Posts: 1,879
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: z06 vs modena

Quote:
Originally Posted by FYRHWK1
You want the weight on the front wheels during braking
A rear heavy desing is still going to want to lose the tail while entering a turn hard because of the extra lateral load placed on the rear tires.

Quote:
Have you ever ridden in a pickup truck driven hard? If so you'd know that when braking hard the rear end gets unloaded, which causes a severe lack of traction for the rear tires.
And there you go..
A mid engined car with a static weight balance at ~40:60 will achieve dynamic balance under breaking, superior to a car with static 50:50 weight balance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtdg19
ut I do not see how a static balance can be better than a dynamic balance. For instance if you were to balance your wheels, a static balance will correct the up/down bouncing of your wheels, whereas when your dynamically balanced, you've not only balanced the up.down bouncing of the wheels, but you've also balanced the side/side wobble of the wheels which can easily be detected by the shake of your steering wheel. Can you explain to me why it is better to be static balanced vs. a dynamic balance.
I'm just going to quote this...

And OoNismoO, the term you are looking for is 'polar moment of inertia'. A mid/rear engined car, like the 360 should have a lower polar moment of inertia compared to a mid/front engined car like the Z06. This should give it better steering respons, in theory.
__________________
The ringing of the division bell, have stopped...
AF User Guidelines
Deakins is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD

Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Car Comparisons

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts