Rosy Outlook - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums
Go Back   Fuelly Forums > The Pub > General Discussion (Off-Topic)
Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-01-2010, 09:37 AM   #11
Registered Member
GasSavers_BEEF's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,831
Re: Rosy Outlook


I agree with what you say about rotating inertia but just the sheer added weight is a huge deal. I work with a bunch of guys that go muddin and they have large tires too (though in a different fashion) their tires can weigh up to 200# each. this can add 800# to the car. that within itself would need a brake upgrade I would think.


not sure about mass. but in VA the factor is the height of the bumper and many get away with it by either adding a second bumper that is low enough or just relocating their bumper to the legal height.

Be the change you wish to see in the world
--Mahatma Gandhi

GasSavers_BEEF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 10:37 AM   #12
Registered Member
theholycow's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,624
Country: United States
Send a message via ICQ to theholycow Send a message via AIM to theholycow Send a message via MSN to theholycow Send a message via Yahoo to theholycow
Re: Rosy Outlook

Boggers that weigh 200 pounds each replace OEM tires that weigh 40 pounds...your math is a little off, that would add 640 pounds. Anyway, donks get tiny tires on those huge rims. I'd be more worried about the leverage of the extra diameter with 26 to 30 inch wheels, totaling 28 to 34 inches vs. the 26 inch tires that might have originally been on the car.

I don't know enough detail about MA's law, but in RI a drop bumper won't help. From the RI motor vehicle inspection manual:
Vehicles that appear to be altered by elevating or lowering the chassis or body height by more than (4) inches from the original manufacturers specified height by use of lift kits, shackle lift kits, tires, spacers, blocks, tubes or any other means or device shall be rejected unless the owner of the vehicle shows written evidence as to the original height of the vehicle when equipped with the equipment customarily installed by the manufacturer.

This sig may return, some day.
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 12:39 PM   #13
Site Team
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 652
Country: United States
Re: Rosy Outlook

Originally Posted by BEEF View Post

I agree with what you say about rotating inertia but just the sheer added weight is a huge deal.
Actually I didn't mention rotating inertia, on purpose. I only mentioned brake force.

You are correct that rotating inertia is a "double-dipper" in the momentum category. Not only do you have to slow forward momentum, but you also have to slow the wheel RPMs (I^4th and all that). That's why racecars will try hard for lightweight rotating components throughout. But when you consider the overall mass of the car, I don't think that the weight/diameter of those wheels will affect things more than a percentage point or two, especially when you remember that at a given MPH a larger-diameter wheel will have lower RPMs.

Think you are saving gas? Prove it by starting a Gas Log, then conduct a proper experiment.
bobc455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2010, 10:20 AM   #14
Registered Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,283
Country: United States
Location: north east PA
Re: Rosy Outlook

But now you have increased the frontal area and have more airflow under the car. An area which wasn't smooth before you shifted the driveshaft and axles more into the airstream.

trollbait is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.