Does anyone know the lightest standard Beetle year model?
Smiley
Smiley ·
BUMP
Anyone?
Smiley
Sides ·
Hmm... only two things I know for definite on your list are:
- Swingaxle is lighter than IRS
- Super's and L's are the heaviest models
Smiley ·
Cheers man. Will edit first Post with the replies.
Smiley
Sides ·
Oh hey - I don't know that strut is heavier than beam... just that strut cars are heavier (remember they have IRS plus a lot of other heavier stuff in 'em)
Whatcha tryin to figure out anyways ???
STIDUB ·
id put money on anything from the 49-59 vintage, base models, no chrome, spartan interior... although, whats heavier the extra metal & less glass of a split/oval or the later models with less metal & big glass...
Sides ·
STIDUB wrote:although, whats heavier the extra metal & less glass of a split/oval or the later models with less metal & big glass...
Glass is DEFINITELY heavier than metal.... try lifting a bonnet compared to a windscreen
STIDUB ·
original factory standard rusty metal or new repaired metal? 😂
Sides ·
Dunno dude - what's your dub made of ???
😉
colonel mustard ·
interesting...
why/what are you trying to work out mate?? I fail to see how its about the wieght..... If you want something for drag racing,a swinger will work for you, if your going for circuit stuff, IRS will benifit you, if you like struts/more modern designs... well you go for struts...?
dangerous ·
...and link pin beam is MUCH lighter than baljoint.
Smiley ·
Sides wrote:Oh hey - I don't know that strut is heavier than beam... just that strut cars are heavier (remember they have IRS plus a lot of other heavier stuff in 'em)
Ok. Sorry. First post changed
Smiley
Smiley ·
colonel mustard wrote:interesting...
why/what are you trying to work out mate?? I fail to see how its about the wieght..... If you want something for drag racing,a swinger will work for you, if your going for circuit stuff, IRS will benifit you, if you like struts/more modern designs... well you go for struts...?
It's not for drag racing. And I don't want it to go fast around corners. Or fast at all.
I'm trying to work out all the lightest components because I want to build one of two things, a super economical Beetle or an eletric converted one.
And with both of them weight is one of the most important factors.
Smiley
Smiley ·
dangerous wrote:...and link pin beam is MUCH lighter than baljoint.
Really? That's quite surprising as I thought they would be very similar.
Smiley
alien8 ·
smileyman3000 wrote:
colonel mustard wrote:interesting...
why/what are you trying to work out mate?? I fail to see how its about the wieght..... If you want something for drag racing,a swinger will work for you, if your going for circuit stuff, IRS will benifit you, if you like struts/more modern designs... well you go for struts...?
It's not for drag racing. And I don't want it to go fast around corners. Or fast at all.
I'm trying to work out all the lightest components because I want to build one of two things, a super economical Beetle or an eletric converted one.
And with both of them weight is one of the most important factors.
Smiley
Personally I would be going down the "super economical" path instead of an electric engine. I love the idea of an electric engine though.It just does not seem like a viable option anytime in the near future, if ever.
Andy ·
And you have not asked about aerodynamics yet?
Are you using it for slow stop/start work or more driving at reasonable speeds?
For what you are doing weight is only an issue for accelerating and hills, aerodynamics will be a bigger issue once at most road speeds.
The way you drive will drastically alter your economy also.
You might want to also factor in the safety improvements on a super/L bug with IRS, struts and disc brakes.
There are electric motor kits available. I have no first hand experience, but posted details from users are very favorable. Cost seemed comparable to a professional full re-build of a motor. Mostly in the USA but have seen a type 3 and beetle for sale in Oz with them.
These were very old and very heavy kits, especially the battery packs, probably much better ones out now.
Good luck with your project, let us know how it goes
Smiley ·
Andy wrote:And you have not asked about aerodynamics yet?
Are you using it for slow stop/start work or more driving at reasonable speeds?
For what you are doing weight is only an issue for accelerating and hills, aerodynamics will be a bigger issue once at most road speeds.
The way you drive will drastically alter your economy also.
You might want to also factor in the safety improvements on a super/L bug with IRS, struts and disc brakes.
There are electric motor kits available. I have no first hand experience, but posted details from users are very favorable. Cost seemed comparable to a professional full re-build of a motor. Mostly in the USA but have seen a type 3 and beetle for sale in Oz with them.
These were very old and very heavy kits, especially the battery packs, probably much better ones out now.
Good luck with your project, let us know how it goes
I had though about all of these things.
I'm not sure whether to go with a standard beetle for the low weight or an L bug for the better aerodynamics.
Safety isn't a concern for me. My daily drivers are Beetles or Bajas with drums all round. They stop and handle fine if you keep them serviced.
It's just research at this stage but I'm leaning towards the electric one. It's definately doable. The electric car from CBB and countless cars from America and other parts of the world have proven that. It's more the costs at this point, which it usually is.
Smiley
Andy ·
Sounds very cool.
Hope you get to follow this one through. We can;t have everyone fitting Subaru motors.... 🙅
Smiley ·
Andy wrote:Sounds very cool.
Hope you get to follow this one through. We can;t have everyone fitting Subaru motors.... 🙅
It's going to be slow going while I save the money. But hopefully.
Smiley
Smiley ·
Does anyone know if drums or discs are lighter? Or does it depend on the kit and the stud pattern?
Smiley
colonel mustard ·
i know that discs are far more effective. but i would think drums are lighter. having said that, type 3 drums are much bigger than type 1 drums..
Snap Crackle Bang ·
Drum brakes are typically used for "Mileage marathon" cars because they drag a little bit less.
The spring can pull the lining away from the drum (if they are adjusted perfectly), unlike a disk pad which tends to always lightly rub.
shaihulud ·
I think that the idea of a super efficient car is a good one. So is an electric car.
Firstly aerodynamics doesn't matter at speeds of less that 90km/h, so I don't think that I'd concern myself much with that.
Secondly a plug in electric car in Australia runs on coal or diesel unless you live in the Snowy Mountains and then it runs on falling water under pressure.
Thirdly the replacement electric motor/s and batteries will probably make the car heavier that a standard petrol car.
It's a good idea, but I don't think that the differences in the weights of standard cars will matter much in the long run.
Go for it. I'd like to see the end result.
Smiley ·
colonel mustard wrote:i know that discs are far more effective. but i would think drums are lighter. having said that, type 3 drums are much bigger than type 1 drums..
Discs for wide five would probably be heavier than drums cause they have the extra flange where the wheel bolts onto.
Smiley
Smiley ·
shaihulud wrote:It's a good idea, but I don't think that the differences in the weights of standard cars will matter much in the long run.
Every gram helps.
Smiley
Andy ·
shaihulud wrote:Firstly aerodynamics doesn't matter at speeds of less that 90km/h, so I don't think that I'd concern myself much with that.
.
Are you sure on that point? I don't think I would agree.
Smiley ·
Andy wrote:
shaihulud wrote:Firstly aerodynamics doesn't matter at speeds of less that 90km/h, so I don't think that I'd concern myself much with that. .
Are you sure on that point? I don't think I would agree.
I'm sure they matter. Just no where near as much as they do compared to higher speeds.
waveman1500 ·
How much are you hoping to spend on this Smileyman? I don't want to burst your bubble or anything, but in my opinion home-built electric cars are much too expensive to be viable at the moment. As I'm sure you're aware if you've done the research, a good conversion with decent performance and some sort of usable range is not going to leave you much change from $10,000, and it could cost far more depending on how carried away you get. If economy is your goal, then you could buy a stock beetle and then put petrol in it for about four or five years with that much money! I am also interested in electric vehicles and would love to build one just for fun and to have a different driving experience, but there's no way I could justify the costs.
Also, if you're looking for ultimate light weight for this vehicle, have you considered using a Manx-style buggy? They surely must be a good amount lighter than a Beetle. What about a Mk1 Golf or Polo?
Oh, and on the subject of low-speed aerodynamics, it really does make a difference. Ask any cyclist who has ever ridden in a peleton, once you cut down the aerodynamic drag your overall resistance drops substantially. Another example is a man who improved the fuel economy of a 125cc Honda motorbike from about 110mpg to 214mpg purely through streamlining. This 125cc bike is essentially a scooter, so it's not like he's breaking the land speed record. Admittedly, motorbikes have much lower rolling resistance, as he shows in a chart below, but reducing aero drag is still worthwhile. As you can see in the chart, at roughly 90km/h the aero drag of a car is significantly greater than rolling resistance.
Cost is not a problem, it just takes time. By the time I save up enough money and finish building it, electric cars probably will be viable.😂
I know that everything you are saying it completely true.
I do have a J&S buggy at home but it is going to be an offroader so elecric is out. plus with a buggy the aerodynamics are pretty bad and you don't have anywhere to put many batteries.
Smiley
Phil74Camper ·
You were asking about standard VW Beetle weights? These come from period magazine road tests from Australian, US and UK magazines. The different countries listed slightly different weights - usually within 20kg of each other - so use these figures as a guide rather than an absolute.
1. 1956 1200 Beetle - 724 kg (14.25 cwt)
2. 1963 1200 Beetle - 741 kg (1631 lb)
3. 1966 1300 Beetle - 795 kg (1750 lb)
4. 1968 1500 Beetle - 825 kg (1815 lb)
5. 1971 1600 Superbug S - 838 kg (16.5 cwt)
6. 1972 1300 Beetle - 820 kg (1808 lb)
6. 1973 1600 Superbug L - 890 kg (1958 lb)
Fuel economy would depend more on the engine size and gearing, and how it is driven, rather than how much it weighs.
Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of the speed, and is also dependent on air density, and the coefficient of drag that is related to the cross-sectional area.
Smiley ·
Phil74Camper wrote:You were asking about standard VW Beetle weights? These come from period magazine road tests from Australian, US and UK magazines. The different countries listed slightly different weights - usually within 20kg of each other - so use these figures as a guide rather than an absolute.
1. 1956 1200 Beetle - 724 kg (14.25 cwt)
2. 1963 1200 Beetle - 741 kg (1631 lb)
3. 1966 1300 Beetle - 795 kg (1750 lb)
4. 1968 1500 Beetle - 825 kg (1815 lb)
5. 1971 1600 Superbug S - 838 kg (16.5 cwt)
6. 1972 1300 Beetle - 820 kg (1808 lb)
6. 1973 1600 Superbug L - 890 kg (1958 lb)
Fuel economy would depend more on the engine size and gearing, and how it is driven, rather than how much it weighs.
Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of the speed, and is also dependent on air density, and the coefficient of drag that is related to the cross-sectional area.
Thanks for your input Phil, I was hoping your expansice knowledge would come in on this.
That's quite a jump between the '63 and '66.
It's actually a little surprising.
Smiley
Phil74Camper ·
Thanks but it's more a case of having the right books to look it up...
Yeah there seems to be some jumps that don't quite make sense; the Aussie '66 1300 was very similar to the earlier 1200, with only a slightly bigger motor, bigger brakes and different seats and trim.
Some of the road tests of the time used a weight that inluded half a tank of petrol - this might account for the extra weight - who knows. Anyway, use the above figures as a guide. Basically, Beetles got heavier as they went along, with the Superbug L the heaviest. I guess this is always the case - the Mk1 Golf was around 800 kg and the latest Mk6 is around 1400 kg. Modern cars are WAY heavier than Beetles were.
Smiley ·
Guess they don't just call them Fatchicks because of the shape.
