From k20a.org/forum/..., yes, probably 300 lbs. more in the front. (How could someone not notice that?)

The IPU weighs about 100 lbs., removed from the back.

2000 Insight 5spd. w/A/C: 1878 lbs.
at 57/43 weight distribution, that's 1070.5 lbs. in front,
807.5 lbs. in back (75.4% of the front weight = three quarters).

Add 300 lbs. to the front, you get 1370.5 lbs.
Subtract 100 lbs. from the back, you get 707.5 lbs., 52.6% of the front weight (only about half).

That's 2078 lbs. total, 66/34 F/R weight distribution, halfway between my "assumed" 70/30 guess and your quoted 62/38 examples.

That's ignoring extra weight of the extra front structure, but then maybe the battery was moved to the back? If so, that would pretty much compensate for the extra structural weight regarding weight distribution.

It's not just a matter of having springs, struts, anti-sway and possible added structure strong enough to deal with the added front weight, you also don't want serious braking doing enough weight transfer to remove too much rear traction, especially if you feel you have to choice but to brake while turning. That's why I was saying the car would, at speed, be very much a hands-on machine.

The ITR might be the "best handling front-drive car ever created", but it has a completely different front and rear suspension layout, with different camber changes with suspension travel vs. the Insight, fully designed to be racetrack-compatible from the start (and it's wider, also helping with corners). I didn't see a strut tower brace to help deal with the extra front weight in corners, and when the g-forces get piled on the Insight will remind him of its integral passive rear steer.

(The '85 CRX Si had/has 57/43 F/R distribution of 1890 lbs. BTW - that's what I was going by. 2174 lbs. sounds more like a '91 Si.)

He might want to play with F/R tire widths and pressures to get it a little more stable at speed, to try to give some surplus front traction to the back, depending of course on use.