Subject	I was thinking in terms of rotational weight, they >
Posted by	CRuNK™ on February 21, 2002 at 5:58 PM
	This message has been viewed 83 times.
In Reply To	It's the same general principle, but also posted by 96-2+2TT(NYC) on February 21, 2002 at 05:35 PM
Message	say lighter driveline parts free up additional hp to the ground and I am assuming the same goes for the wheels since they are the last link in the chain. I am just wondering how big of a difference it will really make, but in an earlier post chip had said that c5's weigh 30ish pounds. Well if you compared the total weight of the rear wheels of c5's and te37's here's what you get, since te37's are about 18 lbs for 18x10's and c5's are about 30lbs, then the total rear wheel weight would be about 36lbs for the te37's and 60lbs for the c5's. Thats roughly a difference of 24lbs of rotational weight to the driveline. to put that into perspective, As I vaguely rember a stillen flywheel saves around 10lbs and the acpt driveshaft saves around 18lbs for a total reduction of rotational mass of roughly 28lbs(give or take a few). I am just wondering If I am looking at this from a logical aspect.
Follow Ups	Am I correct in assuming lightweight wheels follow the same - CRuNK™ 17:32:49 02/21/02 It's the same general principle, but also - 96-2+2TT(NYC) 17:35:47 02/21/02 I was thinking in terms of rotational weight, they > - CRuNK™ 17:58:12 02/21/02 that's why I said it's the same general principle - 96-2+2TT(NYC) 19:15:50 02/21/02 Just making sure =c) (n/m) - CRuNK™ 19:39:51 02/21/02
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.