BRZ on weight scale - 2723 pounds
 

Saw this on the scca forums - original thread with pics is at sub---brzf----

LF 746 RF 765
LR 621 RR 591

Total 2723

Limited
Preproduction
No driver
"Tank was prob' about half full given where the car came from."

Can you provide an actual link?

I found this one on sccaforums...
Didn't see the thread the OP mentioned.

competing forum names are blocked here.

Here's a link to another forum which has a link to the original post.

http://www.vorshlag.com/forums/showt...7178#post57178

Is SCCAForums really a competing forum?

Ugh... was expecting a better F/R weight distribution than that... damn.

If you add the weight back in from a half tank of gas, it should be around 55/45%, which is a little better.

It is less than Ideal, but with a driver, full tank, and maybe a battery relocation I'd bet it gets close to 50/50. I think they probably set it up this way to make the car more prone to oversteer, which fits with their "fun" intentions.

They spent many years researching the ideal distribution - so I'm confident that they got it right, especially with all the positive reviews.

Whoa this thing is pretty light then :D compared to that of an S2000

2,765 lb softtop or 2,864 lb w/ hardtop + AC + audio

What is "the junk in the trunk"? Spare+tools? Also where is 2723 coming from?

The BRZ is supposed to be the heavier car, and 2765 sounds pretty good to me.

So Subaru BRZ Forum dot com post [w/picture for proof] is saying 2723 lbs, which is likely with trunk junk. SCCA forum post is saying 2686 lbs, but then says trunk junk is worth 35 lbs. 2686 + 35 = 2721, only 2 lbs off the other post. Sounds very plausible, and good news that the car is lighter than advertised! The only thought of caution is the pre-prod's touring the USA may not have the full compliment of USA crash structure. Actual production weight may or may not be different. Nevertheless, it's a good first sign.

Umm.. the scales the BRZ was parked on? 2723 is the actual weight of the car.

Here's a question:
Why are people speculating on heavier weights?

As Ryephile points out, the weights reported at sub---brzf---- may or may not be from the same car repored at scca forums. I originally thought they might be, but the 2 lb discrepancy says maybe not. I didn't repost the scca numbers becuase they aren't backed up with picture evidence.

I eyeballed an estimated cg position for the driver/passenger and added them in at 160 lbs each plus 6 gal of fuel at the rear axle and got 53.2% F / 46.8% R, which is right on the claimed distribution.