Top mounted weight vs. cylindrical inserts?
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 8:55 am
- Location: Miami, FL
Top mounted weight vs. cylindrical inserts?
I see a lot of car bodies that utilize the cylindrical weights inserted in the body of the car (http://pinecar.woodlandscenics.com/show ... 968/page/1) and I was thinking, wouldn't this provide less potential energy that a weight mounted to the top of the car as in Mark Rober's youtube video? I know it's splitting hairs but the weight would be slightly higher, right?
Re: Top mounted weight vs. cylindrical inserts?
If I'm reading the question correctly, I believe you have it backwards. You want the weight as low in the car as possible which will move the CM highest up the arc. Remember, the car is sitting at an angle at the start. Many builders who want nothing but speed use 1/4" tungsten cubes for weight and their car resembles the shape of a Hershey bar.
Re: Top mounted weight vs. cylindrical inserts?
This test by Max-V seems to indicate little difference in performance from a small variation in weight placement height.
That said, it is possible that lower weight gives the rear of the car better stability, which would allow you to set your weight further back with less chance of incurring the "wiggle of death", but I don't have any numbers on that.
That said, it is possible that lower weight gives the rear of the car better stability, which would allow you to set your weight further back with less chance of incurring the "wiggle of death", but I don't have any numbers on that.
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 8:55 am
- Location: Miami, FL
Re: Top mounted weight vs. cylindrical inserts?
Perfect, that is exactly the question I had. Glad to see the impact is negligible because I already drilled the holes for the cylindrical weights.