2nd Generation (GE 08-13) 2nd Generation specific talk and questions here.

Biggest Loser...Fit edition.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 6, 2010 | 11:53 PM
  #81  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by blackndecker
Alright...time to get serious. No more "I think," "I heard," or "so-and-so told me." We need to start an "Official OEM parts weight list." All "official weights" will be verified by a pic showing said part on a scale. (Preferably two separate scales and take an average of the two). The picture will be posted underneath the listed part. (555sexydrive...I will add your weights when you post a pic showing the parts on the scale.)

We can add more parts as we go...may be surprised by how much some of this junk weighs. It might also be useful to separate USDM and JDM.
But but it is not a sports........and compromising the seating capacity...
you know what I am sayin' mang???
just kidding LOL

But first a glimpse at your payoff, you are doin damn good bro!
using a popular 1/4 mile calculator 1/4 Mile ET Calculator
(massaging the hp to get the published C&D 1/4 as a base)

stock wt 2489, using C&D base..................=16.6 sec 1/4
now your verified wt of 2240 lbs..................= 16.1 sec 1/4

pics on an expensive digital digital scale you want, here you go as requested........I am at your cervex

stock battery & cover
Name:  Fit1.jpg
Views: 556
Size:  64.2 KB

spare no lugs or jack
Name:  Fit2.jpg
Views: 558
Size:  72.4 KB

rear seat short section, less bolts and belts
Name:  fit3.jpg
Views: 546
Size:  58.1 KB

rear seat large, less bolts and belts
Name:  fit5.jpg
Views: 551
Size:  58.0 KB
 

Last edited by Tork; May 7, 2010 at 05:53 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 01:36 AM
  #82  
bensenvill's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 273
From: Chicago
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by blackndecker
Agree. I try not to feed the trolls It's natural to try and make anything better/faster/lighter/etc.

agreed! although you walk a fine line between what you can do without and whats necessary (and if you give 2 shits about resale value and what is reversible).

I'm obsessive about weight reduction. heres a few of my observations. at steady speed even drastic weight reductions does not net a measurable return in fuel economy. In straight line acceleration, it is a measurable difference albeit rather small. On an autocross course, it is a marked difference (even if you are making it more nose heavy, but perhaps that boils down to driving style).

heres my other car and this is literally as far as you can take a car without substituting out factory parts and being street legal.


there are a few big ticket items that are kinda no brainers to remove, past that its alot of either compromising over feature vs necessity and nit picking ounces vs time commitment. Seriously, give me a direction on what your capable of working on. I go part by part on a car.
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 03:40 AM
  #83  
thefit09's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (13)
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,476
From: Central Texas
haha your crazy!
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 05:29 AM
  #84  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by score04w
wasnt being mean, just making an example out of you. if there werent stupid posts by everybody, this place would be boring. This thread proves it.
I thought his post was humorous, not at all rude or stupid....... This forum is an opportunity for hobbyist and enthusiast to interact, share and learn from and I enjoy a bit of harmless humor that doesn't reflect in a negative way on another person.
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 09:10 AM
  #85  
hayden's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,899
From: tx
Awesome info Tork. I'm not going after this kinda thing with the Fit, but I really look forward to seeing what the car can do quantitatively with the changes (1/4 mile, g-tech, lap times, etc.)

As for f/r weight distribution, a fwd cars rear wheels are basically there to hold the body up, and in many cases, the less traction back there the better. Auto-x folks who drive VWs will sometimes weld a pipe into the crossmember. Can't have too much rear bar!
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 11:35 AM
  #86  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
I love over steer on motorcycles and RWD vehicles. It isn't a problem on longer FwD vehicles with low center of gravity even with leaf springs and solid axle like the VW pickups of the early eighties even though you can't power steer because it is FWD and just doesn't swing out ..... Just lifting the throttle in a bumpy curve is enough to find yourself Traveling backwards in a fwd car that is front heavy, stiffly sprung, short and has a high center of gravity...The only place that over steer steer is apparently beneficial is Auto Cross but a good auto cross car can get pretty squirrelly at speed on a bumpy road with loose sand and gravel and to a lesser amount without... All of the weight reduction is going to handle better with lighter springing and relatively stiff shocks in the rear.
 

Last edited by Texas Coyote; May 7, 2010 at 06:42 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 02:13 PM
  #87  
Fitxxx's Avatar
New Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3
From: Ohio
Originally Posted by Texas Coyote
I thought his post was humorous, not at all rude or stupid....... This forum is an opportunity for hobbyist and enthusiast to interact, share and learn from and I enjoy a bit of harmless humor that doesn't reflect in a negative way on another person.
I agree with you 100%.
I am new to this forum. This is my two cents:
The points that vwli brought up are all valid:
- "get on a diet and drive naked": average Americans are over-weight, losing 10 to 15 lbs is definitely beneficial. Driving naked might work, but only if you are pretty ladies with nice body.
- "Areodynamic drag is a big factor when you go into higher speed which the weight loss is not going to help" I cannot deny that.
- "it is a pain to store the removed seat, and install it every time you need to haul passengers" It may not apply to some people, but majority of us do not have extra room for storage and would not want to spend "2 minutes" per seat as one poster claimed to install it every time.
- "this mod is only good for a small group of people." Of all the Fits I have seen, I have not run into one with the backseat removed yet.
So why are people flaming over him? May be some of the posters spent tons of time in weight reduction and do not want to hear an opposite opinion. I don't see anything from vwli saying weight reduction is stupid and waste of time. The bottom line is, this is a public forum. Everyone can express their opinion. There is no right, no wrong and definitely no stupid opinion in my mind. If you do not want to hear what you don't want to hear, may be you guys should pm each other instead. Please do not ruin a great subject with rude comments.
 

Last edited by Fitxxx; May 7, 2010 at 07:40 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 04:38 PM
  #88  
hayden's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,899
From: tx
Originally Posted by Texas Coyote
The only place that over steer steer is apparently beneficial is Auto Cross but a good auto cross car can get pretty squirrelly at speed on a bumpy road with loose sand and gravel and to a lesser amount without....
True - these short wheelbase cars are a little squirrely to begin with. I don't want to spin it like a top on a fast road, and I'm pretty happy with the balance of the car as is. I will have to get some springs first and go from there, as the rear setup on the Sport feels pretty good.
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 05:26 PM
  #89  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by hayden
Awesome info Tork. I'm not going after this kinda thing with the Fit, but I really look forward to seeing what the car can do quantitatively with the changes (1/4 mile, g-tech, lap times, etc.)
True - these short wheelbase cars are a little squirrely to begin with. I don't want to spin it like a top on a fast road, and I'm pretty happy with the balance of the car as is. I will have to get some springs first and go from there, as the rear setup on the Sport feels pretty good.
No Prob, enjoy adding positive little gems.

Well my car with ummm maybe 140 lbs removed, balance is not upset in the slightest. It just purely and simply performance gained with acceleration, turning and braking that you can feel.
My personal weight loss line is drawn with a list of items I can easily and quickly return to stock (and items that have good resale on ebay)
I am mostly done except I may add a CF hood. Kudos to the guys who go radical though, as it is admirable besides being an interesting read.
The whole concept is proven over and over and dates back to the very beginning of racing and hot rodding.

Question for the guys (blackndecker) who are into this topic
Do you want the pics on pg 5. post 81 also on a separate thread "official GE parts weight)? Do you want more of them?
 

Last edited by Tork; May 7, 2010 at 05:48 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 07:35 PM
  #90  
mhrivnak's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 90
From: Raleigh, NC
Fascinating thread. Question:

Is there much weight difference between manual and automatic transmissions? What accounts for the difference?

Based on my very basic understanding of how they work, I would expect the automatic to have more transmission fluid. Manual has the extra pedal. My gut says the manual will be lighter, but I'd love to hear an explanation of how much and why.
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 07:42 PM
  #91  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by mhrivnak
Fascinating thread. Question:

Is there much weight difference between manual and automatic transmissions? What accounts for the difference?

Based on my very basic understanding of how they work, I would expect the automatic to have more transmission fluid. Manual has the extra pedal. My gut says the manual will be lighter, but I'd love to hear an explanation of how much and why.
agreed props to OP et al for great thread w/clever title
Oh yeah, I have not been on the Honda site lately enough to nail it, but the MT is in the neighborhood of 75-95 lbs lighter, torque converter, the hydraulics and valving that the MT does not require.
 

Last edited by Tork; May 7, 2010 at 07:45 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 08:19 PM
  #92  
blackndecker's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
Tork you're the man, mang!!! +rep.

On second thought...I think an ****OFFICIAL GE PARTS THREAD**** is a great idea.

I haven't had a chance to buy a digital scale yet...probably won't be able to tomorrow either. Got to wake up at 4 AM and drive 1.5 hrs for an autocross meet tomorrow.
 

Last edited by blackndecker; May 7, 2010 at 08:38 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 08:21 PM
  #93  
blackndecker's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
Originally Posted by bensenvill
agreed! although you walk a fine line between what you can do without and whats necessary (and if you give 2 shits about resale value and what is reversible).

I'm obsessive about weight reduction. heres a few of my observations. at steady speed even drastic weight reductions does not net a measurable return in fuel economy. In straight line acceleration, it is a measurable difference albeit rather small. On an autocross course, it is a marked difference (even if you are making it more nose heavy, but perhaps that boils down to driving style).

heres my other car and this is literally as far as you can take a car without substituting out factory parts and being street legal.


there are a few big ticket items that are kinda no brainers to remove, past that its alot of either compromising over feature vs necessity and nit picking ounces vs time commitment. Seriously, give me a direction on what your capable of working on. I go part by part on a car.
+rep for you sir... I have a 01 Civic sedan I'd eventually like to Kswap and strip out. Probably not gonna take the Fit over the deep end, yet...
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 08:37 PM
  #94  
blackndecker's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
Originally Posted by Tork
Do you want more of them?
I'd really like to catalog everything we strip out. Keep em coming
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 09:09 PM
  #95  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by blackndecker
Tork you're the man, mang!!! +rep.

On second thought...I think an ****OFFICIAL GE PARTS THREAD**** is a great idea.

I haven't had a chance to buy a digital scale yet...probably won't be able to tomorrow either. Got to wake up at 4 AM and drive 1.5 hrs for an autocross meet tomorrow.
You can be Fitly frugal, hint:
Companies going out of biz all over, you can find $500-1000 shipping scales for $15-60 at auctions. Or go to a printer (or some place that ships their goods) they will weigh your items for a few bucks. Just my little beat around the bush way of saying, keep the big bucks in your car budget! a really accurate scale that goes up to 50 lbs or so is not cheap to buy new. I bought several high end bathroom scales, a shipping one from sam's club, waste of money imo

What ya did there bringing them to 1st post here & official, is great also, wont hurt to have that in 2 places as people are often asking how much things weigh. We might ask a moderator to sticky it even if that involves moving it to one of the modified sections.
 

Last edited by Tork; May 7, 2010 at 09:30 PM.
Old May 7, 2010 | 09:11 PM
  #96  
trancedsailor's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,235
From: Holmdel, NJ --Exit 114
holy crap 2200lbs in a Fit? Weird, I took out my spare, all the carpet, the airbags, and with 14" RPF1s I don't even think I'm under 2250 with a full tank in the Miata...crazy
 
Old May 7, 2010 | 09:24 PM
  #97  
Tork's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,251
From: Winthrop Harbor Illinois/ Presque Isle Wisconsin
Originally Posted by trancedsailor
holy crap 2200lbs in a Fit? Weird, I took out my spare, all the carpet, the airbags, and with 14" RPF1s I don't even think I'm under 2250 with a full tank in the Miata...crazy
Hey man ,good to see you and nice (but heavy) Miata! LOL j/k
 
Old Jul 19, 2010 | 05:07 AM
  #98  
Lyon[Nightroad]'s Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,827
From: North Cackalacky
5 Year Member
How much does the front and rear bumper weigh
 
Old Jul 19, 2010 | 02:31 PM
  #99  
blackndecker's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
Originally Posted by Lyon[Nightroad]
How much does the front and rear bumper weigh
Dunno...not on my list of weight saving mods.
 
Old Jul 19, 2010 | 02:42 PM
  #100  
blackndecker's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,316
From: Minnesota
I've had these Insight aluminum rotors laying around for a couple weeks...finally gonna get around to fitting them on.
Name:  Drumjpg.jpg
Views: 585
Size:  95.7 KB

As seen on the Spoon endurance racing Fit...




Also looking to shave off some weight on the front brakes as well. I'm looking into a set of Wildwoods, the drag kit is the only set up they sell that will fit on 15" rims. The company quotes a shipping weight of 26 lbs for a set of two, and up to a 30 lb weight savings by swapping out the factory brakes.



Even if I only shave 10 lbs each side with the brake swap, that would equal a grand total of ~20 lbs off each front corner (including the weight saved by going with 15" Enkei rims)
 

Last edited by blackndecker; Jul 19, 2010 at 04:42 PM.



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:49 PM.