bumper bar removal and perspex?

[marc69]

I became a little obsessive yesterday with wieght reduction on the track car, even removed the washer tank.

If I remove the bumper strengtherners which are a fair wieght, reattach the plastic bumper using just the brackets bolted on without the strengthener bar, am I being foolish regarding loosing the strength in the bumpers?
ie, if I did hit something, would the front panel just collapse without the bumper bar?

Also I have some perspex lying about, it is 2mm thick, is this any good for the quarter lights and the rear passenger windows if I can find someone to cut it or is it too weak?

Bearing in mind the car ha to drive 2 hours each way to a track

[GRUNT 16V]

i would use 4mm perspex any thinner and it will rattle in the rubbers

[Jon_nova1]

it depends how hard you hit something, it will offer more protection in a low speed crash but you will damage the slam panel at a slower speed than if you crashed with the bumper bar in place, i haven't had any bumper bars and crashed once many years ago and it caved the slam panel in, but IIRC the GTE bumper i have doesn't have the bumper bar?

and make sure your perspex won't turn yellow too

[mk1nova_rich]

Remove the bumper bars, drill through the bumper where the bolt would sit, then fit some bonnet pins through the original brackets

[marc69]

Remove the bumper bars, drill through the bumper where the bolt would sit, then fit some bonnet pins through the original brackets

That was the plan, just wasn't sure if in a serious accident would I regret having moved the bars?

[marc69]

it depends how hard you hit something, it will offer more protection in a low speed crash but you will damage the slam panel at a slower speed than if you crashed with the bumper bar in place, i haven't had any bumper bars and crashed once many years ago and it caved the slam panel in, but IIRC the GTE bumper i have doesn't have the bumper bar?

and make sure your perspex won't turn yellow too

well I was more concerned with if ti was s erious accident, would I regret removing them?

[marc69]

i would use 4mm perspex any thinner and it will rattle in the rubbers

Apart from the rattle (I could use sealant?) are they likely at 2mm too be too flimsy?

[Jon_nova1]

nar, in a serious accident your front end would be destroyed anyway

[MK999]

Perspex is a trade name for acrylic, if you do hit something or have a large stone whack it etc it will shatter into sharp shards, which is why performance windows are polycarbonate.

2mm polycarb is fine, it's what I have for mine having just acquired colin smiths old windows. 3mm is the minimum by blue book MSA regs though iirc.

[phunkynova]

Like MK999 says don't use Perspex it's to Brittle you better off using polycarb, buy it in one big sheet and use your old glass as templates and cut it with a jig-saw

[BRoadGhost]

Yeah it's the old saying: "You don't get something for nothing." Either you keep the weight & strength or you don't :)

[marc69]

Well over the weekend I am going to do some timed test runs, one with the car as it is, stripped and the other with all the stuff thrown back in the boot to see if there is a big enough difference to justify the increased noise and so on.

I'll post the result once it's been done.

[marc69]

Here's some pics to show how much has been stripped, also the engine bay which I think is a lot tidier, the pic of wires are just some of the surplus wiring I removed which was going nowhere and attached to nothing. I assume it must have been for a different engine at some point.

I dropped sealant (or hard as nails, can't remember) ages ago on the passenger seat, anyone know how I can remove it? Not for the weight saving!!!)



http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo395.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo394.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo392.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo390.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo393.jpg

[16xe_chris]

If you removed all of the sound prodding on the floor and rear section (under the rear seat) that'll save you some weight.

Also either cut off the rear seat clips that are on the rear arches or just unbolt the large arrow type bolt that would normally hold the rear upright seat.

How much of a diet are you putting your car on?

[marc69]

Not sure, going to test it this weekend to see how much difference the wieght makes, if it is not that much, I'll put door cards and front carpet etc back in to make it more liveable.

On the exterior I have removed the rear hatch handle, spoiler, and previously when preparing for MOT removed the sill covers, splitter and so on. May put them back on as the car is now legal so not too worried about it attracting attention but, again depending on how much difference the weight makes.

It may be the case that for more speed my only real options are to buy the jets for the twin 40s or spend cash on going for another engine but, as the budget is small and I have gone way over it with the many problems encountered to get this far, probably getting the most out of the existing 1.4 will be the option. Wieghtloss is free and how effective? Besides I am 2 stone overwieght myself, that would be 14 kilos lighter!!

[burgo]

weight loss is extremely effective in my opinion. my very stripped 1.2 saloon kept up with a mk3 xr2i in a stright line and laughed at it round the bends, as dont forget its not just the acceleration the weight loss helps.

[16xe_chris]

As Burgo says, you will be impressed at how much of a difference weight loss makes.

I just don't think you have gone extreme enough just yet to really notice lol

Burn off the rubber on your outer door handles and get drilling, weight removal can be done cheaply.

Pair of ally boot pins instead of the large locking mechanism? Same with bonnet?

Every little helps

[16xe_chris]

Not sure, going to test it this weekend to see how much difference the wieght makes, if it is not that much, I'll put door cards and front carpet etc back in to make it more liveable.

On the exterior I have removed the rear hatch handle, spoiler, and previously when preparing for MOT removed the sill covers, splitter and so on. May put them back on as the car is now legal so not too worried about it attracting attention but, again depending on how much difference the weight makes.

It may be the case that for more speed my only real options are to buy the jets for the twin 40s or spend cash on going for another engine but, as the budget is small and I have gone way over it with the many problems encountered to get this far, probably getting the most out of the existing 1.4 will be the option. Wieghtloss is free and how effective? Besides I am 2 stone overwieght myself, that would be 14 kilos lighter!!

When you say more speed, do you want more acceleration or more top speed?

What trumpets have you got fitted in the carbs?

Also what gearbox are you using/ final drive ratio?

[marc69]

I mean more acceleration rather than top speed.

the 40s also have no trumpets and the jets are wrong. I tried the car with them when I got it going at first, tuning it so it would idle, it wouldn't rev beyond 3500rpm and the plugs came out completely sooted up, ie fluffy.

The guy who sold the car thought he had taken them from a 1.8 ford. Just now I am running the peirberg 2e2 with extra vacuum so it opens at 3500 rpm, on knockhill I was never below this and it does make a massive difference compared to just having the single barrel. On initial testing 3 weeks ago with a passenger, 0-60 (on the speedo in the car) without the vacuum (2nd barrel) was 10.3 seconds, with the vacum connected in 8.8. Will the 40s make as big a difference again?

It's an F10, CR, no idea what the figures are but it is lot closer than all other novas I havbe driven, at 70mph in 5th gear it is doing 3500 rpm (magic number today) which is the same as my 1.0 does in 4th gear.

[marc69]

I did the testing today.

with having the rear spoiler, grab handel, all side panel cards, door cards, boot carpet and front carpet, spare wheel, jack etc, emergency tools and washer bottle etc removed, a consistent 8.8 secs to reach 60,

With it all thrown in the boot so the wieght difference is there, very dissapointingly for me a consistent 8.8 secs although due to the noise reduction it didn't "feel" as fast. There probably isn't that much wieght in any of this, mostly the spare steel skinny wheel.

Now obviously I understand that wieght reductiondoes work and even with these items removed, over a longer course there would be an improvment in time, but as this car has to travel on the motorway for 2 hours to reach a track which is a short track and as the difference is not really noticable with this small 1.4, I will keep the basic comforts of door cards and front carpet etc.

But thanks to everyone for thier advice which is stored in my head for future cars.....

For more speed I am initially going to have to look at the mechanical side I suppose.

[Jon_nova1]

That doesn't make sense, what you removed must weigh around the same as half a tank of fuel and you can definately tell the difference between a full tank and half a tank

[marc69]

That doesn't make sense, what you removed must weigh around the same as half a tank of fuel and you can definately tell the difference between a full tank and half a tank

I know what you mean, I was dissapointed as I hoped to at least see a .1 or.2 difference, that would then inspire me to look at other wieght savings that folk have suggested. On a longer run than a 0-60 you probably would see the difference, but I had hoped to see an instant acceleration difference.