Skinny on skinnys
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 160
From: mississippi
...
the advantage here is not only weight..but unsprung weight and
much less rolling resistance..
I gained 2/10's when my T/A was a 12 flat car..
going to the skinny's..
also..look to the P165's that have the 44psi max rating vs the
ones rated 35 psi...they have less resistance too..and you don't
have to worrry about breaking belts by over-inflation..
Matt
the advantage here is not only weight..but unsprung weight and
much less rolling resistance..
I gained 2/10's when my T/A was a 12 flat car..
going to the skinny's..
also..look to the P165's that have the 44psi max rating vs the
ones rated 35 psi...they have less resistance too..and you don't
have to worrry about breaking belts by over-inflation..
Matt
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 130
From: Bliss
Wazzzup Matt? How is the car doing? Hey and I haven't asked for a while but how is your son doing (run Forest run
)?
The reason I asked about skinnys is that last year I experienced a .15 drop in ET when I went from my 17x9.5 combo to stock 16x8 on the front. On the rear I dropped another .15 from a similar swap and another large fraction because the 16x8s were a soft compound tire allowing a larger rpm launch.
I understand the mathmatics of unsprung weight, reduced weight of any type and rolling resistance. Also of major concern is rotational mass. If guys are spending a ton on lightweight valvespring retainers and driveshafts without lightening wheels then they are idiots.
I am trying to see where my money is going to be better spent. I can get a good skinny setup or a really cool light weight hood for about the same bucks. I am trying to figure out what will give me the best drop in times. The weight reduction on the car will be about the same, but what I do not know is how much the reduced rotational mass will be an advantage (engine spooling up quicker) over reduced weight over the nose (enhanced weight transfer and traction).
Wow I hadn't thought about it in those exact terms before but this if a little more complex than I first thought.
Oh just food for thought my car is dynoing 343/356 and I have done some recent up grades that should be bumping that number by about 15/15.
BBB
)?The reason I asked about skinnys is that last year I experienced a .15 drop in ET when I went from my 17x9.5 combo to stock 16x8 on the front. On the rear I dropped another .15 from a similar swap and another large fraction because the 16x8s were a soft compound tire allowing a larger rpm launch.
I understand the mathmatics of unsprung weight, reduced weight of any type and rolling resistance. Also of major concern is rotational mass. If guys are spending a ton on lightweight valvespring retainers and driveshafts without lightening wheels then they are idiots.
I am trying to see where my money is going to be better spent. I can get a good skinny setup or a really cool light weight hood for about the same bucks. I am trying to figure out what will give me the best drop in times. The weight reduction on the car will be about the same, but what I do not know is how much the reduced rotational mass will be an advantage (engine spooling up quicker) over reduced weight over the nose (enhanced weight transfer and traction).
Wow I hadn't thought about it in those exact terms before but this if a little more complex than I first thought.
Oh just food for thought my car is dynoing 343/356 and I have done some recent up grades that should be bumping that number by about 15/15.
BBB
Administrator
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 3,664
From: Brunswick, Maine 04011
Rollout is also a factor. larger diameter tire will provide additional rollout. So, depending on how you stage and how you launch you can pick up some ET by breaking the beams differently. I know that moving from a 26" to 28" front made it much easier on the tree in my car.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RUENUF
Cars For Sale
6
Mar 13, 2016 03:37 PM
KillerTA
Wheels and Tires
5
May 31, 2015 12:20 PM