Actual CG of RX-8?
#3
#4
^ nice page, but I already knew how to figure it, the problem is I have no scales. Anyone that has some, this would be realatively easy....
"Finding the center of gravity height can be done in several ways, none of which are accomplished very easily and without some work. Presented here is the easiest method. The center of gravity height is calculated by weighing the car when level and then raising the car at least 10 inches at the rear and weighing the front again."
What I was hoping was, with all the talk about how the RX-8 has a low cg, seems that somewhere there would have actually been a number given from Mazda ...
"Finding the center of gravity height can be done in several ways, none of which are accomplished very easily and without some work. Presented here is the easiest method. The center of gravity height is calculated by weighing the car when level and then raising the car at least 10 inches at the rear and weighing the front again."
What I was hoping was, with all the talk about how the RX-8 has a low cg, seems that somewhere there would have actually been a number given from Mazda ...
#5
Perhaps to spur someone on to make that cg discovery, the reason I ask is ...
I was reading an interview with Toshio Masuda about the Toyoya FT-86 and he said its cg height was 450mm and that was because of the new engine. Their Boxer design sits low anyway and this new one was made even more so and also made to sit further back. As this is part of the 'reasons to be' given by by us RX-8 enthusiasts, I'd like to know about this new entry.
I was reading an interview with Toshio Masuda about the Toyoya FT-86 and he said its cg height was 450mm and that was because of the new engine. Their Boxer design sits low anyway and this new one was made even more so and also made to sit further back. As this is part of the 'reasons to be' given by by us RX-8 enthusiasts, I'd like to know about this new entry.
#6
well even a bone stock factory car will vary some dependent on equipment, wear, etc.
I don't recall it being in the service highlights manual, but will doublecheck. Pretty sure I have never seen it explicitly stated any where. Just the usual marketing generic statements about it being very low.
I could probably determine mine, but it is lowered, lightened, etc. etc.
I don't recall it being in the service highlights manual, but will doublecheck. Pretty sure I have never seen it explicitly stated any where. Just the usual marketing generic statements about it being very low.
I could probably determine mine, but it is lowered, lightened, etc. etc.
#7
CG height isn't going to be published and would definitely vary a few inches based on equipment (ie sun roofs are heavy additions high up on the car). For a sport-ish car like the RX-8, I would think the CG would be below the top of the tire, but how much lower, I don't know. The bulk of the car's mass is below this point (subframes, suspension, engine, wheels, drivetrain). The OD on the tires is like ~25". That would be a good initial guess.
#11
Lol, I read a blurb about that spec and it being lower than "even the RX-8" this morning which spurred me on to find the data. Some of that difference is due to BRZ having a bit smaller tire diameter.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post