what does the 2004 RalliArt weight?
Feb 7, 2006, 05:04 AM
#1
Account Disabled
Thread Starter
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
what does the 2004 RalliArt weight?
hey, I've been searching through the forum and can't find the answer. Has anyone scaled a bone stock 2004 ralliart? I know the curb weight is all over the internet at 2838 and I know you're supposed to subtract 180lbs per each missing person in the car but that math has the car incredibly light so I'm skeptical
180 x3 (for the missing passengers) = 540lbs
2838 - 540 = 2298lbs
I bought a g-tech pro RR and want to put accurate numbers in for the weight.
thanks
- Chris
180 x3 (for the missing passengers) = 540lbs
2838 - 540 = 2298lbs
I bought a g-tech pro RR and want to put accurate numbers in for the weight.
thanks
- Chris
Feb 7, 2006, 02:48 PM
#7
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Myszkewicz
2843 lbs.
Make sure you add your weight to that for the Gtech.
Make sure you add your weight to that for the Gtech.
Trending Topics
Feb 7, 2006, 03:45 PM
#8
Account Disabled
Thread Starter
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I thought the 2838 was the GVWR or whatever..which is why I was subtracting for the missing passengers using the average 180lb per passenger hack.
ok so the 2838 + me at 165lbs.. basically 3000lbs is what I should be using. damn, I didn't realize this car was so light. I'm used to my 3600lb Stealth TT heh.
well here are the results in the very cold weather this morning on the way to work... My front tires are extremely bald so I had to launch at a very low rpm and feather it to keep wheelspin under control.
60' 2.495
330' 6.618
1/8 9.920 @ 77.06
1000ft 12.724
1/4 15.078 @96.26
0-60 6.485
135.7 HP @ 5765 RPM
169.9 ft-lbs @ 3926 RPM
the HP/TQ numbers are skewed for three reasons:
1) I had the car set at 2838 instead of 3000 lbs so it's going to show a little low
2) The proper procedure is to take off half throttle...just enough to get the g-tech to notice you took of, then smoothly shift to 2nd to avoid jerking, then go WOT and hold it to redline and shift to 3rd and coast down so it shuts off.
3) The g-tech will always show lower than a chassis dyno because on a dyno you aren't pushing against the air at high speed. That's the reason they suggest doing the dyno run in 2nd gear with the g-tech...lower wind resistance and you have traction typically from a roll.
on my way home I was unable to reproduce the time..several 15.1's too much wheelspin and it's much warmer outside I suspect. I even powershifted the 2-3 and it didn't help. Damn I wish my stealth would let me shift it like that! It eats syncro's for lunch if you even think about holding the gas to the floor while shifting
P.S. even if you don't have the G-Tech PRO RR you can check out the file I attached with the Free PASS software here http://www.gtechprosupport.com/suppo...s20install.exe
ok so the 2838 + me at 165lbs.. basically 3000lbs is what I should be using. damn, I didn't realize this car was so light. I'm used to my 3600lb Stealth TT heh.
well here are the results in the very cold weather this morning on the way to work... My front tires are extremely bald so I had to launch at a very low rpm and feather it to keep wheelspin under control.
60' 2.495
330' 6.618
1/8 9.920 @ 77.06
1000ft 12.724
1/4 15.078 @96.26
0-60 6.485
135.7 HP @ 5765 RPM
169.9 ft-lbs @ 3926 RPM
the HP/TQ numbers are skewed for three reasons:
1) I had the car set at 2838 instead of 3000 lbs so it's going to show a little low
2) The proper procedure is to take off half throttle...just enough to get the g-tech to notice you took of, then smoothly shift to 2nd to avoid jerking, then go WOT and hold it to redline and shift to 3rd and coast down so it shuts off.
3) The g-tech will always show lower than a chassis dyno because on a dyno you aren't pushing against the air at high speed. That's the reason they suggest doing the dyno run in 2nd gear with the g-tech...lower wind resistance and you have traction typically from a roll.
on my way home I was unable to reproduce the time..several 15.1's too much wheelspin and it's much warmer outside I suspect. I even powershifted the 2-3 and it didn't help. Damn I wish my stealth would let me shift it like that! It eats syncro's for lunch if you even think about holding the gas to the floor while shifting
P.S. even if you don't have the G-Tech PRO RR you can check out the file I attached with the Free PASS software here http://www.gtechprosupport.com/suppo...s20install.exe
Feb 7, 2006, 03:46 PM
#9
Account Disabled
Thread Starter
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Eclipse2Lancer
Sounds right, but not sure.....check the sticker in your driver door jamb....it's listed in there.
Feb 7, 2006, 07:13 PM
#10
Originally Posted by Mellon
unless it's on the passenger side, I didn't find a sticker in the door jamb before I headed out to work this morning *shrug*
My bad.....I thought for sure that had the curb weight listed. Turns out it only lists GVWR. I guess we would need to get the curb weight from the Mitsubishi site....which says it is 2922 (but that is for a 2006 Ralliart Manual Transmission. Can't find a tech doc on a 2004 at the moment....but would have to believe Myszkewicz.....he usually knows what he is talking about!)BTW----dam you only weigh 165!! Man I need to get in shape!
Last edited by Eclipse2Lancer; Feb 7, 2006 at 07:22 PM.
Feb 7, 2006, 08:51 PM
#11
Here's some data for the 2004 models. I threw in the OZ Rally A/T for comparison.
EDIT: Oh, and I'm only 175. 
Code:
OZ Rally Ralliart M/T Ralliart A/T
Overall length 4,585 (180.5) 4,585 (180.5) 4,585 (180.5)
Overall width 1,695 (66.7) 1,695 (66.7) 1,695 (66.7)
Overall height 1,450 (57.1) 1,420 (55.9) 1,420 (55.9)
Wheelbase 2,600 (102.4) 2,600 (102.4) 2,600 (102.4)
Tread-front 1,470 (57.9) 1,470 (57.9) 1,470 (57.9)
Tread-rear 1,470 (57.9) 1,470 (57.9) 1,470 (57.9)
Overhang-front 955 (37.6) 955 (37.6) 955 (37.6)
Overhang-rear 1,030 (40.6) 1,030 (40.6) 1,030 (40.6)
Ground clearance 165 (6.5) 140 (5.5) 140 (5.5)
Curb weight 1,245 (2,744) 1,290 (2,843) 1,310 (2,888)
GVWR 1,670 (3,681) 1,780 (3,924) 1,780 (3,924)
GAWR-front 920 (2,028) 960 (2,116) 960 (2,116)
GAWR-rear 780 (1,719) 840 (1,851) 840 (1,851)
Engine Model No. 4G94 4G69 4G69
Displacement 2.0L 2.4L 2.4L
Transaxle Model No. F4A4B F5M42 F4A4B
Type 4-speed auto 5-speed manual 4-speed auto
Fuel supply system Electronic controlled multiport fuel injection
Feb 7, 2006, 09:24 PM
#12
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Myszkewicz
Oh, and I'm only 175.
That data's pretty interesting. Would it make much of a difference if the weight were calibrated correctly?
Feb 7, 2006, 10:00 PM
#13
Account Disabled
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: lake forest, CA
Posts: 1,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by blackhawkRA
135 baby!
That data's pretty interesting. Would it make much of a difference if the weight were calibrated correctly?
That data's pretty interesting. Would it make much of a difference if the weight were calibrated correctly?
the hp/tq would be more accurate if the weight was right. also the 1/4mile is a little fast for a stock RA.
150!
Feb 7, 2006, 11:20 PM
#14
Originally Posted by blackhawkRA
135 baby!
That data's pretty interesting. Would it make much of a difference if the weight were calibrated correctly?
That data's pretty interesting. Would it make much of a difference if the weight were calibrated correctly?
It could make a difference, depending on how far off you set it. Always better to use the correct numbers if you have them, wouldn't you agree?
Feb 8, 2006, 04:19 AM
#15
Account Disabled
Thread Starter
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm thinking that if you set the weight too light it's going to give low HP/TQ numbers back, if the weight it set too heavy it's going to give artificially high HP/TQ numbers.
I ran a 15.1 when I first bought the car with my old g-tech that I verified to be perfectly accurate for the E.T at the 1/4 mile track.. that was on damp pavement that day so I had to feather the throttle but I had new tires back then.
trust me this engine was broken in the right way haha.. it was punished.
I've got the weight set to 3008 lbs on the g-tech so I'll do another HP run just to see what it says. I know it won't be the same as a dyno, but it'll be interesting. I don't believe the weight that's input affects the 1/4 mile e.t. and trap measurement so we won't see a change there.
I ran a 15.1 when I first bought the car with my old g-tech that I verified to be perfectly accurate for the E.T at the 1/4 mile track.. that was on damp pavement that day so I had to feather the throttle but I had new tires back then.
trust me this engine was broken in the right way haha.. it was punished.
I've got the weight set to 3008 lbs on the g-tech so I'll do another HP run just to see what it says. I know it won't be the same as a dyno, but it'll be interesting. I don't believe the weight that's input affects the 1/4 mile e.t. and trap measurement so we won't see a change there.