Where's the weight?

So I got my new power window motor from the courier yesterday for my G35. It's under 2 lbs. Likely closer to 1 lb...made me think of 2 things:

1 - No wonder the power windows on these cars fail so often (recall that GRM had to do one on project 350z as well)

2 - Power options are not the reason these cars weigh 3400 lbs

The frames of new cars are built like tanks compared to older ones, that's where much of the weight comes from. A g35 isn't a small or sparsely appointed car either.

Modern power windows are actually undercutting the weight of crank windows, so weight isn't a reason to avoid them any more...but I'd say reliability and safety are.

Yep, most of the weight is probably due to safety requirements and sound deadening. Unfortunately, they try and make the power window motors (and other devices) as low cost as possible.

Sound deadening? No way. Maybe 50 lb of it in the whole car.

Take a look at how stiff a modern car is compared to a 240Z or something like that. Unfortunately the internets can't tell me the number for a 350Z or thereabouts for a direct lineage, but a 280Z is under 2,000 lb/deg and a Z4 convertible is roughly 10,700 lb/deg. A BIG difference, and likely more weight is required to get there.

In reply to tuna55:

Yes I think that's a good point. For a 12 yr old car, with 170,000km on it, it feels remarkably solid. Basically no creaks or rattles.

I don't really think these cars "feel" heavy when driving, although others on this board have made differing comments. They do feel like they can take some enthusiastic driving without complaint. Everything feels solid and beefy.

Weigh the wiring harness from a G35 and then a 240Z. count the weight of any computers in with it. The mechanism may well be lighter than manual window cranks, but the system weight not so much.

Most of the weight in modern cars comes from safety standards and the desire for body rigidity. Fact of life. Your chances of surviving a crash in a 370Z vs. a 240Z are significantly higher.

The luxury items add up too, but there is way more in the structure and safety side.

GameboyRMH wrote: The frames of new cars are built like tanks compared to older ones, that's where much of the weight comes from. A g35 isn't a small or sparsely appointed car either. Modern power windows are actually undercutting the weight of crank windows, so weight isn't a reason to avoid them any more...but I'd say reliability and safety are.

I've got a 1966 Cadillac. Weighs about 4500 lbs, which isn't that far off the weight of a new Camaro convertible From what I can tell, the weight in that car is in the thickness of the body panels and the engine block - plus sheer size. The density of new cars is what's amazing, they're much more tightly packed.

I was surprised at how much the AW11 mr2 weighs even as a bare chassis, there is a whole lot more weight and structure to an AW11 than a 240Z. The 350Z rear subframe and control arms are made of aluminum to save weight but I guarantee they weigh a lot more than the erector set IRS on the 240Z. The wheels and tires on the 350Z also weight at least twice as much, same for the brakes, seats, dash, stereo has to be 10 fold the early radio and single speaker.

I had a '57 Ford convertible that actually started to sag in the middle. Noticed it when trouble closing the doors.

A buds 71 vert vette - in very good shape, cannot have its doors opened or closed when on jackstands.

doc_speeder wrote: In reply to tuna55: Yes I think that's a good point. For a 12 yr old car, with 170,000km on it, it feels remarkably solid. Basically no creaks or rattles. I don't really think these cars "feel" heavy when driving, although others on this board have made differing comments. They do feel like they can take some enthusiastic driving without complaint. Everything feels solid and beefy.

Based off of my Dads G37, I'd say it is heavy, and feels heavy... but it also has more than enough power and suspension to overcome it. I can't come up with much better, especially when you consider the price/reliability/maintanence. I don't personally like it as an enthusiast car, but as a DD, it is perfectly capable of jumping on an on ramp or even through any twisties; you'll have a lot of fun.

In any case, the weight comes hand in hand with it being such a solid feeling car.

Pull the seats. Oh and lift with your knees. They weight almost 90 LBS each. A set of the 4 wheels and tires are in the 175 LB range too. So combined, you are around 350 LBs for those 2 items.

In reply to bmw88rider:

Yes I can imagine the seats are heavy. They fit me very well too, although I can see them being quite narrow for a bigger dude. Actually the whole interior does not feel like it would be a nice place for a large fella to spend time.

tuna55 wrote: Sound deadening? No way. Maybe 50 lb of it in the whole car.

Ever take the interior apart in a newer car? You might have 10-20lb of carpet at each corner. Three or four layers and thick foam in between. That is before everything else in the car...

DeadSkunk wrote: Weigh the wiring harness from a G35 and then a 240Z. count the weight of any computers in with it. The mechanism may well be lighter than manual window cranks, but the system weight not so much.

Oddly enough, the computers make the cars lighter, because CAN cuts down the amount of wiring and switches and keeping things low-current means the wires can be a lot smaller.

Take a look at the wiring in a high end car from just before CAN began to take hold. Yeesh. My favorite is the 928 because everything is laid out well-organzied, but the entire passenger footwell is nothing but harness connectors.

In that specific example, some of the weight is from platform sharing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_FM_platform

http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/platform-sharing-for-dummies-feature

This efficiency, however, comes at a price. Shared components cannot be optimized for each vehicle as carefully as dedicated components can be. Take Nissan's FM platform that shares some pieces between the 350Z and Infiniti FX45. The big FX weighs 4497 pounds at the curb, and it can carry another 1000 pounds of people and cargo. It's safe to say that any structural or suspension piece from the FX that ends up in the two-seat 350Z is far stronger-and heavier-than it need be.

I remember pulling a door for a Saab 900 and carrying it from the far end of the Yard to the entrance. For a car made in 1988 it was remarkably heavy, and much heavier than the door that was on my ten years older Fiat 124. Just imagine what the door on a brand new car weighs

Funny, I was just thinking about the difference between SAAB and Volvo. SAAB seem to make cars that are solid and heavy-feeling like Mercedes. Everything seems to be very, very massive in heft.

Volvo isn't nearly as bad.

I was really hoping that the answer to the "where's the weight" question would be on here so I could drill it full of holes or remove it entirely.

my 1993 gmc k1500 weighed 4500lbs and had a 7k lb tow rating

my dad's 2004 gmc k1500 crew cab weighs 5500lbs... but it can tow 8600lbs.

Just one of those things I suppose!

HiTempguy wrote: my 1993 gmc k1500 weighed 4500lbs and had a 7k lb tow rating my dad's 2004 gmc k1500 crew cab weighs 5500lbs... but it can tow 8600lbs. Just one of those things I suppose!

Was having this discussion at work regarding the shop's truck. We used to have a '94 K1500 with the ubiquitous 5.7, now we have a '03 Sierra (K1500) with a 4.8. Same trans, same gearing, same tire size. Trucks both extended cab short-box. The Sierra, on paper, should be just plain better since the 4.8 makes more power and practically the same torque as the old 5.7. But according to the weigh station, the K1500 weighed a hair over 5000lb and the Sierra is close to 6000lb.

The Sierra is an altogether nicer vehicle to drive, though. The interior quality is leaps and bounds better, the cab isn't creaky and floppy, and you don't get nearly as much of the "driving a hinge" feel from frame flex when driving over undulating roads.

I keep suggesting that we could fix the percieved power issues with a simple call to Magnusson but this keeps getting shot down.

Cars are just bigger than they used to be. That G35 has a 112.2" wheelbase--it's not exactly small. Bigger means heavier, and the heavier the unibody, the more the brakes, suspension, wheels, etc. are going to weigh.

People want more luxuries, not less. We're the anomaly: people buying new cars want infotainment systems and satnav and air conditioned seats and Bluetooth and everything else. They want more sound deadening, not less. There's more systems integration, and that means more wiring. Lugging 10 airbags around doesn't help, either.

When you actually find a manual transmission, it has more gears than years past, so it's heavier.

Where's the weight? It's everywhere, and the pounds add up fast.

Something else I noticed about modern cars. Used to be if you went to a junkyard, you would find that many of the American cars had body braces that kept the fenders and the like in place... talking a slender rod to keep the edge of the wheel well from buckling or getting bent easily.

I do not see that too much anymore. Older cars had a lot of "dead space" that was empty and did nothing.. today's cars seem to be "full". I am not talking the density that was described above, I am talking about how the framework of the vehicles themselves comes out to the edges instead of just leaving huge gaping wheel wells, large engine compartments, and empty space between the front and the radiator

mad_machine wrote: Something else I noticed about modern cars. Used to be if you went to a junkyard, you would find that many of the American cars had body braces that kept the fenders and the like in place... talking a slender rod to keep the edge of the wheel well from buckling or getting bent easily. I do not see that too much anymore. Older cars had a lot of "dead space" that was empty and did nothing.. today's cars seem to be "full". I am not talking the density that was described above, I am talking about how the framework of the vehicles themselves comes out to the edges instead of just leaving huge gaping wheel wells, large engine compartments, and empty space between the front and the radiator

Something to think about: A Cruze has roughly the same dimensions as a Celebrity, except the Celebrity is ten inches longer.

I would not be surprised in the least if I put the cars side by side and found that the ten inches was mostly the gap between the bumper and the radiator. GM was horrible for wasted space in the A-bodies.

(They're still bad for it. Pull up the carpet in a GTO and you'll see a six inch air gap in places. TONS of wasted space on that chassis)