Unsprung Weight

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

BigJ

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Posts
5,448
Reaction score
1,559
Thanks for your into Jason. If I understand the testing that you did it was all straight line acceleration and had nothing to do with handling, braking and suspension performance. These are all real-world issues that Raptor owners have to deal with if/when they move to larger, heavier wheels. And that doesn't begin to address the benefits of having a taller sidewall vs. a shorter sidewall offroad.
Correct Sir. Yes all my testing was straight line and acceleration testing. We did no handling or braking eval at all.

I caution anyone from looking only at unsprung weight though, when it comes to handling or suspension performance. Tire width and sidewall is going to have a huge affect on that; in other words, maybe someone can use 20" wheels if they also go with 37" tires, and not suffer greatly in the handling department. In theory, there could be some degradation. But how much in "real world" situations? I'm not sure...
 

frogslinger

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Posts
1,072
Reaction score
4
My car registered about 10-15 less wheel hp with m heavy wheels on than with the oe ones...

BTW the wheel that I posted weighs 6.1 lbs... sure they are 3K a piece...
 

frogslinger

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Posts
1,072
Reaction score
4
Correct Sir. Yes all my testing was straight line and acceleration testing. We did no handling or braking eval at all.

I caution anyone from looking only at unsprung weight though, when it comes to handling or suspension performance. Tire width and sidewall is going to have a huge affect on that; in other words, maybe someone can use 20" wheels if they also go with 37" tires, and not suffer greatly in the handling department. In theory, there could be some degradation. But how much in "real world" situations? I'm not sure...

Rule of thumb is sidewall>=(wheel diameter/2) if you intend to go offroad.

so our 34.2 ish tires are perfect with 17 inch rims; 8.6 inches of sidewall > 17/2. If you want to run 20s and do good offroad you need 40s...

of course it is just a rule of thumb. Really if you have anything over about 8 or 9 inches of sidewall you are probably fine.
 

frogslinger

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Posts
1,072
Reaction score
4
no can do unfortunately... peak wheel HP with the current setup was 438 and change with the current setup and peak hp with the old wheels was 426... same rpm. I only have access to the graph from the old wheel run.
 

BigJ

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Posts
5,448
Reaction score
1,559
Bummer. If you have access to the datafiles, I can use those to create a graph too if you want. I have access to several dyno manufacturers' data file viewers and software.
 

MarkT

FRF Addict
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
1,202
Reaction score
26
SNIP
Physics is physics, and I have no doubt the bigger wheel shows a detrimental affect under the microscope. But in "the real world", which is what my test tries to replicate, there just was no statistical advantage of one over the other, given the power we were pushing and the weight of the cars.

Which data set is more "accurate"? That's up to the reader to decide :)

What happens to the HP if you take an engine with 500HP at 6000 rpm and double the weight of the flywheel? Nothing. It still has 500 HP @ 6000 rpm. It will have the same torque at 6000 rpm. The only difference is that under the same load it will take considerably longer to rev up (or down).

The problem is many dynos don't measure force at all. Instead they measure acceleration and *calculate* the force. If you did the above test on an "acceleration" dyno, the HP and torque readings would drop when you doubled the flywheel weight... but in reality, the engine would have the same HP and torque.

IIRC... the "****" testing was done on a high-end dyno that can actually measure *force*? That might be the answer.

Flywheels are like batteries. They store energy. At the same rpm a big, heavy flywheel will store more energy than than a small, light flywheel. That big flywheel is harder to get spinning and harder to stop... just like a big battery takes longer to charge and holds that charge longer.

Wheels and tires are like flywheels. It's not the diameter of the wheel that matters, but the weight of the whole tire/wheel assembly and how far from the center of the wheel the weight is concentrated. Adding heavier wheels and tires... or wheels and tires with the weight concentrated further from the center of rotation... will make the wheels harder to get spinning and harder to slow down. This will affect acceleration and braking in the real world.

Were the 20" wheels and tires appreciably heavier than the 17" wheel/tires? Or was the combo lighter? How far was the center of mass away from the axis of rotation for each? Those are questions that need answering before you can say what effect a wheel/tire combo might have on acceleration/braking. (ie "straight line" performance)

P.S. The fuel economy change will be proportional to the number of starts/stops in the testing. At a steady cruise for the whole test, heavier wheels/tires will not make a difference in economy. Start speeding up and slowing down and now you have to expend a lot more energy to get those wheels turning...
 

BigJ

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Posts
5,448
Reaction score
1,559
Correct Mark; the **** dyno is a SuperFlow and measures force (via strain gauges) as well as acceleration.

We tested the stock wheels and tires (55lbs) against the factory optional upgraded wheels and tires (65lbs). Both were roughly the same overall diameter.
 

MarkT

FRF Addict
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Posts
1,202
Reaction score
26
Correct Mark; the **** dyno measures force (via strain gauges) as well as acceleration.

We tested the stock wheels and tires (55lbs) against the factory optional upgraded wheels and tires (65lbs). Both were roughly the same overall diameter.

It's not easy... because besides weight you have to consider the traction of the tires and some tires are more efficient than others... what do they call the amount of energy a tire absorbs... "mechanical hysteresis"? Anyway, the more common term would be "rolling resistance". Width of tread... all of that matters.

The one thing we know is that you proved the factory wheel option did not hurt the "straight line" performance! :thumbsup:

(and that's really the only practical way to assess any other tire/wheel combo on the Raptor... test it.)
 

BigJ

FRF Addict
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Posts
5,448
Reaction score
1,559
Exactly right. The engineer in me would love nohing more than to build a fully equipped atmospherically controlled lab, and test the hell out of this stuff measuring every specific detail. And in those details I think we'd see huge differences.

But then too, the experienced 'get it done' guy in me thinks there's a lot to be said for "close enough" in the "real world".

And that's what the **** is all about. How do all the details combine in the real everyday world you and I live and drive in?
 
Top