Unbeknownst to me, Dave Sweet, aka crazyd, moved out to my neck of the woods earlier this year. Through a random chain of other car geeks we both recently discovered this, and Dave came over tonight. We checked out each others' cars, drove around, BS'd about cars and stuff, and had a beer, as all car people are supposed to do when they get together.

We also put both his car and my car on my scales. Here's what we found.

Since I'm a stickler for details, this post is going to include way too many.

The cars:

'88 Formula
5-spd Getrag, PW, PL, tilt, cruise, AC, sunroof
Stock wheels and tire sizes


'88 GT
5-spd Getrag, PW, PL, PM, tilt, cruise, AC, sunroof
18x8 245/40-18 rear, 17x7 225/40-17 front
12" 'Vette rotors with adaptors and stock calipers
Battery in front

The first thing we did was drive both cars to the gas station and fill them up with gas, so both tanks are full.

The scales:

I have a set of these: http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productdetails.asp?RecID=851 I've weighed a bunch of cars on them and I've found that they tend to be consistant within about a percent. I do not know how accurate the total weights are, but for my normal purposes the connsistancy is what matters so I haven't upgraded to the good digital scales yet.

The short version of that is: Don't swear by the actual weights, but the relative weights of the cars is close, as are the percentages.

The testing method:

1) Weigh Formula
2) Weigh GT
3) Weigh Formula again to check for scale consistancy. As mentioned above, it was within a percent.

All weights are without driver.

The picture of Dave's car on the scales with mine in the background:



The data:

1) Formula

code:

---

LF		RF		Front
620		660		1280
				43.3%
				
	Total			
	2956			


LR		RR		Rear
828		848		1676
				56.7%
Left		Right		
1448		1508		
49.0%		51.0%		
				

LR+RF diagonal				
1488				
50.3%				
				
RR+LF diagonal				
1468				
49.7%				

---

2) GT

code:

---

LF		RF		Front
612		692		1304
				41.6%
				
	Total			
	3136			


LR		RR		Rear
928		904		1832
				58.4%
Left		Right		
1540		1596		
49.1%		50.9%		
				

LR+RF diagonal				
1620				
51.7%				
				
RR+LF diagonal				
1516				
48.3%				

---

3) Formula again

code:

---

LF		RF		Front
612		652		1264
				43.1%
				
	Total			
	2936			


LR		RR		Rear
848		824		1672
				56.9%
Left		Right		
1460		1476		
49.7%		50.3%		
				

LR+RF diagonal
1500
51.1%

RR+LF diagonal
1436
48.9%

---

The summary:

The V8 GT is 180-200lbs heavier than the similarly optioned V6 Formula, and carries about 1.5% more of its weight on the rear tires.

Because the published weight difference between the Formula and the GT was largely due to their difference in base options, I think most of this is due to the V8. Dave said 180lbs is what Archie has been saying, and our data agrees with this. Admittedly, the Formula vs. GT body panel weight difference is one variable that we didn't hold constant. I guess we need to figure out a way to get my scales, my Formula, Dave's V8 GT, and Dave's V6 GT in the same place. I can probably scrounge up some digital scales for that.

My thoughts on V8 Fieros and the importance of the weight difference:

First, thank you very much Dave for letting me drive your car. I really enjoyed it.

As far as straight line acceleration, this is the fastest Fiero that I've driven so far. In addition to the two stock motors, I've driven a couple 3.4 DOHCs and a NA 3800.

I've said in the past that I'm not a V8 guy because I thought a high winding motor suited the character of the car better. I must say that after driving that small block, "really stinking fast" suits the character of the car pretty well, too.

Is that extra 180lbs and 1.5% rear weight important? Not really. I say that with the knowledge and experience that in a race car 180lbs is huge. But these aren't race cars, they're street cars. Look at it this way: how much of a handling difference do you notice when your friend jumps in the passenger seat? Because that's the weight difference we're talking about.

The extra power more than makes up for it with any kind of driving that is safe or legal on the street. Dave and I drove some twisties (and we all know Fieros rule in the twisties) and the car handles quite well.

So is there a small block Fiero in my future? Nah, but only because it's not really my style. But I'll jump at every chance I get to drive one.

Thanks Dave!

------------------
Doug Chase
Chase Race
Custom: cages, exhausts, fabrication
Duvall, WA
425-269-5636

wonder how the bigger wheels and brakes are factoring in. any extra stereo stuff in the v8 car?

wow thats gr8 info to print out and save in a folder doug..and thank you for posting and thinking of all of us..i know for a fact that this post will help out l8er in other projects of mine.

That's pretty dog-on heavy relative to the vehicle title weights and in my experience the comparison of a passenger in the seat to a V8 centered about to and a half feet further back doesn't give the same feel, for straight line acceleration it's very impressive but in my car I noted the heavyness in the back end to be somewhat irritating along with the squatting tendency. It was a lot of fun but I never forgot it was back there and not because of the exhaust note.

Good job on the info and one more reason you can't trust manufacturer posted figures, they under estimate some of the most important; gas mileage and weight two areas that are very important when trying to have your cake and eat it to. Now I know why some of these cars seem a bit slow for the power plant swop. GM must be using the weight of the 4 cyl right off the assembly line of 1984 with no options and no gas then estimating for the following years.

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: That's pretty dog-on heavy relative to the vehicle title weights

Agreed. I think my scales read a bit heavy overall. But like I said, they're consistant and that's good enough for my current purposes.

For comparison, I've had my Formula on 4 pad digital scales twice at National Tour autocrosses. Both times it had a half tank of gas, sunroof out, spare tire removed. Once it weighed 2690 and once it weighed 2770. The 80lb difference between those two weights is a mystery to me, but I think they're closer to reality than the 2936 that my scales read.

------------------
Doug Chase
Chase Race
Custom: cages, exhausts, fabrication
Duvall, WA
425-269-5636

Here's an excerpt from a thread I posted a couple of years ago comparing a stock 88GT with an 84 coupe with a Quad 4.

"A buddy of mine weighed my '84 that I just put a Quad 4 in and my 88 GT (stock 2.8L). This was done with a Longacre Computerscales system that he uses on a stock car.
Neither car has a sunroof. The '84 had a full tank and the 88 GT a 3/4 tank. The '84 has power nothing and the 88 GT has power everything. The '84 has a stock battery up front. The '88 has the battery in the rear. The '84 has Koenig Theory 16 X 7 wheels with Kumho 215/50 tires. The 88 has the stock lace wheels and Yokohama 215/60 in back and 205/60 in front.

88GT with spare tire, jack and lug wrench:
Front - 1205 lbs
Rear - 1604 lbs
Total - 2809 lbs

88GT w/o spare tire etc.
Front - 1169 lbs
Rear - 1599 lbs
Total - 2768 lbs

84 Quad 4 w/o spare tire etc.
Front - 1122 lbs
Rear - 1500 lbs
Total - 2622 lbs

I was surprised by the results. The '84 seems to feel much lighter driving and I think that people here have quoted numbers under 2500 lbs for a stock '84. But this was done with a high tech weighing system and when I jumped in the car it pegged my weight pretty well. You could knock 50 lbs or so off by running with a 1/4 tank, 35 lbs by removing the passenger seat and a some more lbs with a lighter battery. But all in all getting under 2500 lbs seems tough."

Okay I've gotta point out a couple of things I've noticed here since studying these numbers more closely.

1 - The weight distribution wheel-by-wheel changed in interesting ways. The V8 car gained 100 on the LR but only 46 on RR. The weight is actually distributed better in the rear than the stock car with only a 14lb difference. I point to the battery relocation and the 2 3/8" leftward shift of the engine for this.

2 - I'm baffled why RF is 80lbs heavier than LF on V8 and only 40lbs on V6. The battery's smack in the middle under the spare. But once I'm sitting in the driver's seat...

Dave

I'm hoping like heck I can hang on to my unfinished 84 coupe in storage for the weight reasons which on my title is listed as weighing just under 2500 lbs and I almost feel like I can grab it and turn it over. As for the 40 additional pounds on the right front of the V8 car relative to the V6 car it makes sense to me given that if an Archie kit is involved the weight of the V8 is dispositioned to the right side of the car which would have an affect on the front as well, otherwise a strut or shock might be misbehaving

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: As for the 40 additional pounds on the right front of the V8 car relative to the V6 car it makes sense to me given that if an Archie kit is involved the weight of the V8 is dispositioned to the right side of the car which would have an affect on the front as well, otherwise a strut or shock might be misbehaving

This isn't a standard Archie build, as I stated previously the engine was moved 2 3/8" to the left. Both front shocks are new.

Then maybe the distance between two of the scales changed while moving the cars