10 pounds is 10 pounds. You do that 10 times and it's 100 pounds. That's why guys cars are HEAVY. They have the totally WRONG attitude. They think, "that's only 10 pounds, doesn't matter"........WRONG way to think. If you want the car light, you need the opposite attitude. Remove every OUNCE you can. First thing, is ask yourself "does the car absolutely NEED this part".......if it does NEED that part, how do you make that part weigh less.

Yep... plus.. if it needs that part/bracket.. can
I make it do 2 things so I can remove the other thing..
but yes.. you have to think small but find a bunch of
small things.. like cutting excess bolt lengths down ..
many times they have extra length thats not needed...
brackets on production cars were meant to last 100K miles
and rough use(like off road).. if it was steel... try making
it out of alum.. its actually fun to try and make the car
lite

I know all about taking weight out of the car... This has gotten to be the place you ask a question and then wait for the response you WANT to hear. The bottom line comes down to the owner and how much he wants to cut up his car.

Jeff

I removed my inner fenders on my Dart. Then made some out of aluminum. Never weighed them to find the difference, but I know it was somewhat significant. Plus it gave me much more room to work around the engine and headers.

How about a fiberglass front valance and a glass bumper.

I don't mind cutting at all if I have nothing to really worry about. 10 pounds is great and more access would be a true blessing. I have a fiberglass valance...bumper is still on the want list

This is for RacerX, I slide a plate under the mount and simply boxed it in. Then ran a 1.25 bar to the cage. I hope this helps

Yes it does..............Thaxs

Another way to do that.........is to run a piece of tubing across the inside of that shock tower, with two tabs hanging off it to mount shock

Shock mount to cage = 1 5/8" from top of factory mount (centered) to cage. I don`t use the stock style shock any more. Drill through the side of the factory mount for your through bolt. Use spacers to center the shock.


Rad Mount and Cradle Assy. = I don`t have any better shots of this , but the rad mounts consist of the lower 1 1/2" x 3" aluminum channel between the frame with foam tape where the rad tanks sit.The stock front rails were extended with 2x3" aluminum also. the extensions telescope into the stock rails perfectly and are pinned in place , allowing the complete rad assembly to be removed by dissconnecting the rad hoses and pulling the pins. The upright supports are made from 4" aluminum angle (swiss cheesed) as you can see. What you can`t see , is the back which is thinner (2" angle )Which accepts bolts 3/8" which clamp the rad in place . I again used foam padding to cushion the rad tanks. The car can be moved and worked on without the front clip in the way.



The 1" aluminum tubing used as the front fender support, was made to the same dimensions as the original rad wall . MEASURE EVERYTHING BEFORE YOU CUT ANYTHING OUT !
Hope this helps ! PM me if you have any questions.
chryco

Thanks, you have a beautiful car and you have given me some good ideas.
I'm running blown alcohol, my cage and fuel cell is in front so I'm not running a radiator. On the radiator support pictures I was hoping to see more of the bracket you made to support the front of the fenders

Obviously on a Blown alcohol car this doesn't apply but my first thought whenever this is brought up is that often times 10 pounds of inner fenderwell strength from a monocoque frame (which a mopar unibody essentially is) can easily be worth 30 pounds of tube steel in terms of structural rigidity, beaming (as when your front wheels are in the air) and torsional strength.

Review some of those great old youtube vids of the late 50's/early 60's Crysler Unibody frame design and the Herb Adams Chassis Engineering book and some may rethink the hacking many people do on A/B/E bodies....particularly regarding flex in the heavy cowl area. sometimes (and obviously not in all cases) a little strategic reinforcement (gusseting or tubular cross bracing) of the unibody can be stronger AND LIGHTER than completely reengineering your chassis.

The biggest impediment of the unibody inner fenders tends to be the limits it puts on header radius and diameters as well as between round engine access. but those fenderwells also form a lightweight and rigid 'box' that supports the engine and suspension from the main structural bulkhead which on a Mopar is the firewall.

I remember in 74 Jenkins/SRD built a semi monocoque (tube steel and structural sheet aluminum ) framed pro stock Vega (Grumpy's toy X1 I think) with McPherson struts and structurally braced aluminum inner fenderwells that was super light for its time.

This is not 1974....................A properly done snoutbar, attached in the right place, makes the inner fenders on a unibody car, just dead weight that serves no purpose

With a big hemi I would think setting the motor back another inch (or as far back as possible) would help more than saving 10 pounds.

With the snoutbars, I'll certainly agree with Monte on the Properly designed and installed part (and that it's not 1974, lol) The problem is that a fair number of the "test & tune" (Not certifired class race) cars out there are 'hack jobs' and NOT PROPERLY designed...not by a LONG SHOT

I only pointed out the SRD car because for 74 it was light years ahead of what was out there (was was one of the first race cars to use Computer aided design and structural analysis) and it was still somewhat relevant to most of the non Front Clipped Moparts cars out there. On an E body with it's long hood and overhang, I wouldn't immediately dismiss the support the inner fenders provide to supporting the rest of the front body structure, support that can go away nearly entirely with Snout bars.

Ounces make pounds

Curious as to why you think moving the motor back is the right thing to do. We have no idea what the weight percentages are on the car and THAT is what matters, NOT where the motor sits. Automatically thinking the motor needs to sit under the windshield to make the car work is very old school thinking and most of the time is not needed to make a car work correctly. Tires, tracks and suspensions are much better these days, and cars needing to be 50/50 to work is not current thinking.

I know a lot depends on the performance level and intended usage, but MORE power, directly equates usually to the car needing MORE nose weight. We have to run our drag radial car at better than 55% on the nose, or it wants to turn over. I was recently working on an older type top sportsman car that was 52% on the nose, with an 800+ nitrous motor that we were NEVER able to hit hard enough to get it on the tire.

I know those are extreme examples, but the OP DOES have a large HEMI with a blower. Common sense would tell you it makes tons of torque. That is going to punish the tire and suspension. The motor too far back will only increase that fact.

But to the original premise of the post, lost weight is FREE horsepower, and the more weight you lose, the more power you make. So 10-15lbs is 10-15lbs

I'm with you monte...but by that same logic wouldn't the loss of 10-15 pounds on the front have a similar (though not identical)effect on the Front/rear weight distribution in terms of %F/R? Your adding rear bias (shifting the CG back) by taking any weight from the front of the existing CG.

E bodies and 71-Later B bodies TEND to be (even) more front weight biased than 70-earilers, I think the cowl area with the hideaway wipers, bigger windshields and longer overhangs have a lot to do with it. But E bodies are inherently worse (nose heavy) in terms of F/R because the rear overhang is so short. Just basing the "assumption" of moving a big blown Hemi back on an E body SHOULD help...but I get and understand your point. I also had a Blown BB in my 70 Charger and it was nose heavy as He!! too. so just a semi-edumactaed guess here...590's got a lot of Pics on Photobucket to give us an idea. The cal trac/monoleaf/spool is almost certainly lighter over the rear axle than stock F/R...

My Big block Duster (both B and RB) hooked much harder and felt like a different car when I got rid of the spool mounts and used an elephant ear to set the motor back a good 1 1/2" (to where the PS valve cover was nearly rubbing the firewall). so did removing the tank and putting a fuel cell in the rear tire trunk well. So...Just going from Gut from my personal experience on those types of cars.

Jason Pettis said Dougie`s car needed 58+% iirc for the above mentioned reasons............

Mine has 55% on the nose and still does this occasionally...Looking to move my fuel cell up front and relocate the battery as I still need more front %

Nice...
I don't know where I sit on weight distribution, but that 14/71 is heavy. I'm thinking chop out all the weight I can and add it back it where it seems to like it most. Inner fender walls will come out this weekend. I would love to see some pics of what people have done for front shock support with the wheel wells gone, Radiator support to hold up the front of the fenders and what all they cut out on the inner quarter pannel. Do they chop the whole thing out? My cage supports all the suspension mounting points, I assume people leave it empty just like on the fiberglass/carbon fiber bodies?
Thanks,
Jeff

A couple of pieces of moly tubing to hold the front
of the fenders.. thats all thats needed.. thats all
I did on the race car and the same for the Rampage..
I have alum inner fender wells on the Rampage but they
are not structural, just to hide the tubes