LocostUSA.com

Wow, 100 pounds in it, sounds suspicious.

Which one?

I make no claims one way or another about anyone else's work, but my figure is accurate within the limits of the scale, which should be +/- a couple of pounds. My figure did include all the fluids at the manufacturer's specified quantities. Just those 3 items add 41 lb.

The GM LX9 engine and when it was designed isn't something I know about. However, the Ford 3.8L is a late 1970s design, which evolved considerably in terms of the materials used in its construction until it was retired in 2007. The one out of my donor is believed to be a 1997, but I haven't been able to verify that using the engine serial number.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

I'm not sure if someones seen this before, I copied it from the net. Granted some of it isn't practical in a locost.

Ted

=======

mod edit: List removed because it already appears earlier in this thread and the basic point here anyway is to try to get numbers with better descriptions of what is actually weighed.

_________________
86 BMW 325 coupe powered by Ford. http://www.e30v8.com

The "Williams" list has been kicking around in one form or another for decades. My personal experience with engine weighing showed that there was a serious inaccuracy in that list. As many others have pointed out in other posts, and the whole reason this topic was created, the weights in that list don't include enough information even when they do have some corollation with the real world.

By the way, I tried tracking down and emailing the guy a few years back to give him some correct information. Found what seemed like a good address, but the email must have gone to a dead letter box.

John

As a matter of fact...It's already taking up just as much space back on page 4 of this thread too.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie

As requested - here is an S2000 F20c

Complete engine & trans, all accessories & wiring except AC compressor. No exhaust, few small emissions sensors removed, no fluids, no shifter

Tare'd (is that a word?) the engine leveler out of the equation but there is likely a few lbs one way or the other between the strap and the chains.

as pictured was 408lbs

_________________
My Build thread: F20C powered Autox & track toy

Buy my car! - F20C Race car

Way to go Tongboy

Lets say -90 for the trans, +10 for manifold and fluids so we have aprox. 330/150kg for the engine.

Here's a weight comparison I found.
http://www.v8s2000.com/forums/showthrea ... DIFFERENCE
f20c/trans=460 lb
ls1/t56=626 lb
both weights with all ancillaries and headers. I would have thought the difference in weight would be greater than 166 lb.

how much weight does a typical turbo setup with intercooler add ?

eh, that ls clearly has aftermarket headers, not sure how accurate of a comparison that is after seeing that.

I know in both cases the stock trans (the t56 and whatever the f20c is paired with) are heavy for what they do - the t56 bone dry is ~115+ and I know the honda tranny isn't exactly light. I know the ls stock clutch is crazy heavy (think 35+lb stock flywheel) where as the stock f20c ap1 flywheel is something like 14lbs.

I should have weighed my as-stock-as-they-come ls1 dropout when I had it but I didn't

another local in town weighed his 5.3 as removed and the cast manifolds alone were ~27lbs.

i'd bet the ls has a substantially lower center of gravity than the tall 4 cylinder with all the variable valve fun on the top of the motor

_________________
My Build thread: F20C powered Autox & track toy

Buy my car! - F20C Race car

That Angelfire address has been dead for a long time; maybe ten years before the date on that list. The earliest versions predate the Web. Perhaps someone tried merging two or more versions.

I quit updating the list because, of all the things I've ever done on the internet, that list has caused me the most grief. I used to get bombed with *angry* rantings from people who didn't agree with it, and felt it was somehow my fault, instead of directing their spleen to any of the original sources I referenced.

Between that, and seeing edited versions "copyrighted" by other people, and the general hate the list seems to engender in a certain type of person, I quit uploading new versions.

just to throw this out there, i have read that the mercedes benz I5 om617 turbo diesel weighs 525lbs, and i read somewhere else that it weighs 500 minus the injection pump and some vacuum stuff, and that the pump is around 22lbs. i have one of these i don't know what to do with yet, but i'll eventully weigh it to confirm.

_________________
TV and Beer! What could be better?
http://weregonnahaveatvparty.blogspot.com/

For anyone interested(and I'm probably the only one...) The difference in head weights between the KA24DE and KA24E is 52lbs for the DE and 45lbs for the E(according to shipping weights I can find on websites that offer them). I have the E, so I got curious and decided to find out. So, I'm guessing, maybe 10 lbs less with the cam sprocket and a handful of timing chain-links factored in, too.

My brother has a Stalker with the GM V6. He and a couple other owners are in the process of switching to the LS3 V8, so here's a data point:



That said, my brother had earlier weighed a *complete* GM V6 engine and came up with 445 lbs, so who knows if the above numbers are ~45 lbs low or not.

_________________
Midlana book: Build this mid-engine Locost!, http://midlana.com/stuff/book/
Kimini book: Designing mid-engine cars using FWD drivetrains
Both available from https://www.lulu.com/

Figure about 50 lbs, though that includes the exhaust manifold, which would also be on the NA engine, sans turbo flange.

_________________
Midlana book: Build this mid-engine Locost!, http://midlana.com/stuff/book/
Kimini book: Designing mid-engine cars using FWD drivetrains
Both available from https://www.lulu.com/

Obviously at least the LS3 weight is quite substantially on the low side, and as such I would expect the L67 weight to be similarly under reported...While obviously it is possible to get that weight reading from either engine in some unknown state of disassembly, those are are not what I would consider believable numbers for a nearly ready to run engine. The 609lb for LSx+T56 on reported the previous page, and shown in a picture on scales is much more believable, as is the 455 as weight by your brother even if it too is in an unknown state of build. It's cases like this where a few pictures can be worth a thousand words.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie