Less unsprung weight
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 878
From: Clovis, NM
Less unsprung weight
How would more or less unsprung weight effect handeling?
I'm not thinking about like going around a track, more along the lines of sudden up and down changes like hiting uneven section of road or drag launching with a car with all most enough power to lift the frount end.
What would puting lighter (or even heavier, more massive) parts in the suspention on the unsprung side of the suspention do?
I'm talking about parts like the frount LCA's, breaks, wheels, spindles and lighter rear end (saying if I could), you know the weight that the springs don't hold up.
I'm not thinking about like going around a track, more along the lines of sudden up and down changes like hiting uneven section of road or drag launching with a car with all most enough power to lift the frount end.
What would puting lighter (or even heavier, more massive) parts in the suspention on the unsprung side of the suspention do?
I'm talking about parts like the frount LCA's, breaks, wheels, spindles and lighter rear end (saying if I could), you know the weight that the springs don't hold up.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,367
From: Burlington, NJ
Re: Less unsprung weight
unsprung weight is weight not supported by the suspension. the axle, wheels, brakes, that kind of stuff. there's a page on this already somewhere in the suspension forums. i'm too lazy to look, but feel free. reducing the weight allows the suspension to do it's job effectively, allowing quicker responses and recovery...
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,367
From: Burlington, NJ
Re: Less unsprung weight
ok, i got bored...here's a link that really does well explaining...i'll look further
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/sprung-c.htm
http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/sprung-c.htm
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 715
From: Brookville, PA
Re: Less unsprung weight
Less unsprung weight makes for quicker response and better ride quality.
However, dropping unsprung weight by running inappropriate parts for your use isn't smart at all. For instance, I wouldn't run a tubular k-member on a car that is meant for hard cornering.
However, dropping unsprung weight by running inappropriate parts for your use isn't smart at all. For instance, I wouldn't run a tubular k-member on a car that is meant for hard cornering.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 878
From: Clovis, NM
Re: Less unsprung weight
Well the V6 is going to be a hard cornering car and I have a proform kmember that I'm haveing sent over here to modify. It will be lighter than a normal V6 and have STB and a home made Titanium alloy wonder bar.
Now I read that mopar link and it defined a lot, it also told about rules that don't exist like that 10:1 sprung/unsprung weight thing.
When I was talking about lighter unsprung parts and wheels that was not worried about rotating mass, I talked to my engineer friend about how rotating mass would effect a cars ride as in how to factor that in, he wasn't sure but did gave me some rotating mass equations I barely under stand.
Now I read that mopar link and it defined a lot, it also told about rules that don't exist like that 10:1 sprung/unsprung weight thing.
When I was talking about lighter unsprung parts and wheels that was not worried about rotating mass, I talked to my engineer friend about how rotating mass would effect a cars ride as in how to factor that in, he wasn't sure but did gave me some rotating mass equations I barely under stand.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,367
From: Burlington, NJ
Re: Less unsprung weight
well, the stb and the kmember are all sprung weight. the majority of the unsprung weight is everything not supported by the suspension, and some of the suspension itself. i dont really see the benefits of unsprung weight in accelleration, but decelleration i see huge benefits. it's like a merry-go-round...get it up to speed is almost easy, a few pushes and you're there...stick out your leg and it'll be ripped off if you're not careful. same effect for wheels/brakes. they have to work harder on the "dubs" and "double dubs" to stop them.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,253
From: Birmingham, Al
Re: Less unsprung weight
Originally Posted by Severous01
well, the stb and the kmember are all sprung weight. the majority of the unsprung weight is everything not supported by the suspension, and some of the suspension itself. i dont really see the benefits of unsprung weight in accelleration, but decelleration i see huge benefits. it's like a merry-go-round...get it up to speed is almost easy, a few pushes and you're there...stick out your leg and it'll be ripped off if you're not careful. same effect for wheels/brakes. they have to work harder on the "dubs" and "double dubs" to stop them.
“Unsprung weight” moves when the wheel moves. “Sprung weight” moves when the chassis moves.
Weight controlled by the suspension, and usually below the suspension, which forces it into contact with the road surface or other components, is unsprung weight.
Weight supported by the suspension, and usually above the suspension, which separates and isolates it from the road surface and other components, is sprung weight.
Weight controlled by the suspension, and usually below the suspension, which forces it into contact with the road surface or other components, is unsprung weight.
Weight supported by the suspension, and usually above the suspension, which separates and isolates it from the road surface and other components, is sprung weight.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
brothaslide
2016+ Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and General Discussion
6
Jan 9, 2016 12:11 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
Sep 14, 2015 09:20 AM