Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What is unsprung weight. What are the advantages. When I went for wheels I was told that I didn't want a steel wheel because I wanted to keep the unsprung weight down. I think this is probably a sales pitch for expensive wheels. I was going to get offset 10" magnums. I was told to stay with aluminum. Any body use the 10" custom magnum aftermarket wheels? Any trouble with out of round? Any other info about wheel do's and don'ts?

Neil
http://communities.msn.com/Myhtrd/homepage
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1595545&a=12154418&p=44311400.jpghttp://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1595545&a=12154418&p=45167776.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,217 Posts
....... "the weight of componants not supported by the spring". This includes most of, or part of, the wheel/tires, the a-arms, the spindle and brakes, the rear axel assembly, etc.etc... The formula for how much of the "part of" on componants like a-arms is complicated, as it changes, and is not relevant here.

Unsprung weight can be a critical factor in how a RACE car handles, as it will be the determining factor of how closely the tire contact patch follows the road surface.

On a normal street driven car it is much less critical. I wouldn't worry about staying with aluminum wheels for less unsprung weight if what you want are Magnums. Unless you are pushing the car to it's limits in a handling situation regularly, you won't ever see a difference.

Also bear in mind that many of todays "alloy" wheels are just as heavy, if not more so, then a good steel wheel. They are not light racing wheels.



Hal
Love hard, drive fast, wear your seat belt.

PS, that's my 'bird...... My Mustang is too ugly to take pictures of yet........*G*.

http://www.teleport.com/~cosa/bird2.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
I suspect it refers to the weight of the components that are below
the springs. That would be the rear axles and center section,
the wheels, and the brake drums/rotors. As for the performance
gain from keeping this weight down... I don't really know, other
than that keeping overall weight down is always a good thing.

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
I've had a lot of people (including this site) that told me to stay a away from a 9" rear for the reason of unsprung weight. How much of a difference will I see in handling? What are the weights of a 8" versus a 9" complete rear? Hopefully, this can answer some of my questions too. Thanks. -Brian.

1967 fastback S-code (project)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
You pick up about 125 lbs. going from 8" to 9", all of it "un-sprung". You'll feel it in the bumps, ride is clunkier, but handling for me was about the same - this is not a sports car.
If < 325 HP I'd stay w/ 8". If need posi and rebuild, find a 9" so you can handle more power later - (who doesn't want more power?).

66 Coupe, 351W, C4, 9" Versailles+Auburn
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top