Where does all the rear weight come from?

[SUB-FT86]

Its sad that some of you guys own the damn cars yet know not enough about its balance. It is 55/45 with no one in the cars and 53/47 with 2 occupants in it.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

Thats BS, few will have people in the back, a spare tire, and a full tank of fuel when things get twisty. Ill bet these cars are more like 60/40 real world.

No. Most of the front drivers weight reside on the rear half of the car in the FRS/BRZ's case

[DaJo]

Alot of the weight in the centre/rear is the frame...then you add the differential, drive shaft, rear axles, driver & rear seats, gas tank, trunk lid, and etc...




To give you a better idea of the structural weight...look at the rear...then look at the front; majority of the front are panels...(which also includes the super light-weight aluminum hood)

The front still house all the heavy stuff like the engine, battery, transmission, and etc, but engineers put it as far back as possible...relocating the centre of gravity all the way back...help evening out the weight ratio.

[GenkiElite]

Man you guys ar makeing something simple really complicated. Please, go on.

[SubieNate]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

Thats BS, few will have people in the back, a spare tire, and a full tank of fuel when things get twisty. Ill bet these cars are more like 60/40 real world.

Yeah, I totally take my spare tire out every time I hit the twisties.

[Shagaliscious]

Originally Posted by fatoni

that strikes me as odd since the brz should have more amenities in the cabin. ive heard that the cars were 53/47 with people in the car and 55/45 without. was that what you were thinking of? otherwise, youre talking about a 50 lb shift in nearly identical cars

Ahh, that could be it.

I could've sworn I saw on the Subaru website they said 55/45, but they were probably stating what it is without people.

[Shagaliscious]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

Its sad that some of you guys own the damn cars yet know not enough about its balance. It is 55/45 with no one in the cars and 53/47 with 2 occupants in it.

I find it hilarious that it bothers you. Really hilarious actually. Thanks for the laugh.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Shagaliscious

I find it hilarious that it bothers you. Really hilarious actually. Thanks for the laugh.

What bothers me is owners speaking on something they don't know about.

[SUB-FT86]

Here's a explanation of how it it works

With no occupants the car weighs 2,760 lbs stock so 55% of weight is (somewhere around) 1,518 lbs and the 45% is 1,242 lbs

Now lets say two occupants weigh 150lbs a piece. That would mean around 2/3rds of their bodies will be on the rearward side of the car so it would have about 200 lbs on the rear and about 100 on the front.

2760+300=3,060 lbs and minus 53% from that and you get 1621.80(f) and 47% 1438.2(r) on the rear.

[NickFRS]

Go take a corner, pray to the subaru gods, understand how easy it was to drift, and stop bickering. Car handles amazing. Plain and simple. Now what you should really be wondering is why they didn't slap a turbo on it with 6/4 breaks and a heavier clutch with adjustable suspension. <- O wait because that would add another 10 grand on the price tag and put it on a STi level which they don't want to do for marketing. This is an afordable sports car... you got what you paid for. If you don't like it. sell it for the 25-30 grand you picked it up for and buy a prius.... then complain how you didn't get 60+ MPG.

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by Shagaliscious

BRZ is 55/45. FR-S is 53/47.

Really? If true, that explains why I keep seeing both set of numbers mentioned.

Then I read this reply:

Originally Posted by fatoni

that strikes me as odd since the brz should have more amenities in the cabin. ive heard that the cars were 53/47 with people in the car and 55/45 without. was that what you were thinking of? otherwise, youre talking about a 50 lb shift in nearly identical cars

So who is right or are we still in the assumption phase?

[ahausheer]

Originally Posted by SubieNate

Yeah, I totally take my spare tire out every time I hit the twisties.

Auto X?

[ahausheer]

Originally Posted by DaJoian

Alot of the weight in the centre/rear is the frame...then you add the differential, drive shaft, rear axles, driver & rear seats, gas tank, trunk lid, and etc...




To give you a better idea of the structural weight...look at the rear...then look at the front; majority of the front are panels...(which also includes the super light-weight aluminum hood)

The front still house all the heavy stuff like the engine, battery, transmission, and etc, but engineers put it as far back as possible...relocating the centre of gravity all the way back...help evening out the weight ratio.

Thanks, this is the kind of thing I was looking for, not a debate about 45 this 47 that. That picture of the frame is pretty cool.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by fistpoint

Really? If true, that explains why I keep seeing both set of numbers mentioned.

Then I read this reply:



So who is right or are we still in the assumption phase?

im not assuming (although that doesnt mean im right), scion has marketed the car as having a 53/47 split but that was with passengers. some people get bent out of shape about that but a) weight balance front to rear isnt as important as people make it out to be and b)if it is, that is a great balance as you should be accelerating at the apex of most curves shifting a little weight rearward giving you the best weight distribution when you actuall need it