Going on a diet

Discussion in 'Drag Racing' started by mavman, Dec 4, 2007.

  1. mavman

    mavman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,028
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Vehicle:
    '75 Maverick, '03 super duty, '04 Mustang Vee-six!
    Some of you have figured out that I've been busy putting the Maverick on a little diet. The car was weighed last season, came in at 2520 without me, and I'm 172 lbs. So that's what...2690 lbs race weight? Somewhere close to that (plus or minus 10).

    I had a few main goals for the offseason. One was to upgrade the brakes. I did some research and found that there are a million different brands, some really cheezy and cheap and some really expensive and SUPER light. So I settled with Aerospace. I got the fronts and rears. I pulled everything off yesterday and boxed it up. Combined front and rear is about 125 lbs. That's the stock Mustang 2 rotors, calipers, brackets as well as GM S-series pickup rear rotors, calipers, brackets and lines. The Aerospace front kit was 13 lbs total for both sides. The rears were heavy coming in at 16 lbs for both sides. That's 29 lbs. Total weight savings is just shy of 100 lbs. There is more weight saving in the future but I need to let my bank account recover a little first. And from there, I need to go out to the shop and see if I can figure out ways to cut weight here & there to get this thing down under 2400 lbs. We need to keep in mind that as long as we don't remove something that is NECESSARY for chassis strength and safety, that a lighter car is a safer car for the most part. I do know that my passenger side door weighs about 10 lbs more than the driver's side....the pass. side has been filled in a hundred differnet places. If I had to do it over again, I'd have just replaced the door or door skin but at the time, I didnt' have that knowledge! Fiberglass stuff would have been nice too but it's a pain to deal with most of the time and it ain't cheap. Plus, the weight savings isn't all that significant....but every little bit adds up in a hurry. Maybe in the future.....

    So here's a couple pics of the Aerospace brakes. They're just too dang pretty to use on a drag car, at least I think so. Kind of looks weird....rest of the car is beat up, dirty, grimy on the bottom but the brakes look good....LOL.
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  2. scrapper60

    scrapper60 MCCI Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Location:
    Alabama
    Well Todd, when you get tired of that old dirty, beat up, grimy thing, let me know. I'll haul it off for you to get it out off your way. LOL. I won't even charge you.
    Brakes looks killer!
    Jerry
     
  3. newtoford

    newtoford Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    5,475
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    157
    Location:
    New Castle Delaware
    Vehicle:
    '76 Maverick, '76 Comet, 78 Monte Carlo, '85 Cutlass Supreme, '86 Regal Limited, '87 Grand Prix
    looks great
     
  4. don graham

    don graham MCG State Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,800
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    302
    Location:
    arizona city, az.
    Vehicle:
    70 mav, 71 grabber, 73 Comet, 2004 f-250 crew cab diesel, 2001 f-250, 2004 explorer, 2007 Gold Wing trike.
    looks good. sounds like .1 off of the et already.
     
  5. robtech

    robtech has a bellybutton

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    holy crap those are purdy
     
  6. stmanser

    stmanser Looking for a Maverick

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Davenport, Iowa
    remember one very very very important thing.. you need weight on the rear wheels for traction. the more you take off, will equate to less downward force on the rear wheels and you will inevitably lose traction from it..

    good to hear you are making some serious weight changes,... i cant believe you shaved 100 pounds just from brakes.. that is really amazing

    i heard that 100 pounds is .1-.2 in the 1/4 gained.
     
  7. Old Guy

    Old Guy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    Messages:
    1,291
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    95
    In a lot of case's, yes but with a backhalved setup that is installed correctly, and a four link coil over suspension, instant center relationship to adjustments on the bar's, can compensate for a lot of traction problems. And the 31.5x13.5x15 tires, are helpful too. Added weight is another story and used sometimes in certain situations but it all revolves around the location of your instant center, that is what Todd told me anyway. I am from the old school of run whatch ya brung, racin and junkyard part's. Sure was a lot of fun though.
     
  8. PINKY

    PINKY .....John Ford.....

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,875
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Louisville, Ky.
    Vehicle:
    1970 Ford Maverick
    looks sweet!
     
  9. ericglo

    ericglo Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    366
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Location:
    n/e illinios
    Vehicle:
    1972 maverick
    You could probably drop some weight by putting coil-overs on front.
     
  10. mavman

    mavman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,028
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Vehicle:
    '75 Maverick, '03 super duty, '04 Mustang Vee-six!
    actually I wish I had used struts instead of a-arm front suspension, but the whole Mustang2 front suspension in this car was a big learning experience. Next car (if I ever do another one) will have struts for sure. There's another 75-80 lbs difference between a standard A-arm suspension and a strut suspension.
     
  11. ericglo

    ericglo Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    366
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Location:
    n/e illinios
    Vehicle:
    1972 maverick
    I ordered a strut front end from aje should be here in a day.
     
  12. robtech

    robtech has a bellybutton

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i demand you post many pics of the front strut suspension
     
  13. maverick1970

    maverick1970 MCG State Rep

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2003
    Messages:
    7,372
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    242
    Location:
    Missouri
    Vehicle:
    69 1/2, 70 Maverick and 71 Grabber
  14. mavman

    mavman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,028
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Vehicle:
    '75 Maverick, '03 super duty, '04 Mustang Vee-six!
    I don't have shock towers, THANK GOD. So no AJE struts for me. I referred to struts as the normal chassis car style struts. Like the pic below. That is how my front end is set up...no stupid shock towers in the way, only a couple tubes running from the cage to the frames. In my opinion, I see no real good reason to keep the towers AT ALL. If you have the money for the struts that use the shock towers, then seems like it would be money ahead to just run a regular double A-Arm setup (like a Pinto or Mustang2) or a pair of tubes and struts, like pictured below. I guess if you want the towers in the way of changing plugs and completely eliminating install of a 9.5" deck engine (or larger....), that's cool. I can see other reasons why the AJE kit is used but for what I am doing (drag only), it was a complete waste of time to even contemplate keeping the towers. I tried that....they were in teh way of EVERYTHING. I can also tell you that JUST backhalfing the car, and installing the Mustang 2 front suspension, those 2 mods alone were worth .4 in the 1/8. Went from 7.00 to 6.60's and 50's with nary a change to the engine or transmission. In fact, I didn't even break the engine apart other than pull the covers to check the valves. Was it a big weight difference? Not really...went from 2580 (full stock chassis with 351w/powerglide) to 2520 after I did the M2 and back half. And best of all, it's simple to service with the exception of pulling the pan (which can't be done in the car). I can have the engine out in about 30 minutes now. Try that with full length headers while the shock towers are still in the car. Ain't gonna happen...especially with a 351w!
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2007
  15. ericglo

    ericglo Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    366
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Location:
    n/e illinios
    Vehicle:
    1972 maverick
    strut front end

    here a set of art morrison pro street strut I put on a 66 F-100 I was building!!
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2008

Share This Page