im currently autoxing a civic dx hatch in street mod and I was thinking of relocating the battery in a moroso box to the floor directly behind the passenger seat to help move some of the weight from the front of the car towards the rear and get it as low as possible. would it be worth doing or should i look a spending my money elsewhere? thanks

 

How long have you been autocrossing?

Is it worth it? If you're trying to be top level competitive, then every little bit helps... if you're doing it for fun and still learning then I'd say na don't worry about it. If you're looking to get faster, and this is a slightly canned response, then the best thing to work on is "the driver". Not completely knowing your situation or what else you have already done to the car makes it difficult to respond properly.

For me, if I moved the battery to the back, I'd have to figure out a new way to pack my car every week... not worth the extra aggrevation.

 

i'll never stop learning but anyways, ive been autoxing for the last few years not every weekend but i have probally about 20 events in. at this point ive already done too much work to say well learn how to drive the car first then mod it, which is of course exactly what i didnt do, but thats in the past now. the post a few days ago about making a fwd car nationaly competive in sm has really sparked my interest, not that im going to make it that far right away. but i've decided to do work on the hatch for the rest of this year and get as much seat time as posible and then go all out competing in local events next year and try to leave the car alone and see where it leads me.

at this point i basicly have the suspension setup the way i want it with the exception of getting higher springrates for the rear, the engine is also about where i want it the things i would like to acomplish before next season would be a seat and 5pt harness (already have the rollbar) and then my goal is to try to get the weight of the car to a minumium and get it corner weighted

so now that you know the background what do you think?

also do i have to worry about running a remote cut off switch if im going to be just autox it for now, considering it is a daily driver (for now )

 

any more input on this, I'm curious myself

 

To me it is not worth the hassle. I just put a lighter weight battery in the stock location. If I need some weight in the rear I just run more gas in the tank......which I have found helps keep my car from bouncing so much since I have these crappy Tokicos with 550lb springs in the rear! Konis coming soon, I hope.

IMO, I really dont think front to rear weight balance is as important with FF as is the overall/corner weight is.

 

Relocated Battery

Pros:
- More room in the engine bay to work on the engine (my main reason in doing it)
- Engine bay looks cleaner
- Better weight distribution
- Battery size is no longer dictated by battery tray/room

Cons:
- Wiring it up can be a hassel
- 3 Words: Battery disconnect switch
- Less cargo room
- Some classes don't allow it

 

Yeah, your story sounds a bit like mine. I'm not quite to CSP level in car or driver yet, but working towards both. In competition every little bit helps and if the rules say you can do it, then do it. If moving the battery helps better balance your car then go for it. I don't think the cost is really that expensive, the enclosed, lightweight battery is probably the most expensive part.

However before moving the battery, you may consider having the car corner weighted to see if in fact the weight transer would "really" help.

I hear you about the daily driver thing too. I really need to be running stiffer springs, but being that it's still going back and forth to work, my back, neck and jawl just can't handle any more road stiffness.

Cut off switch isn't necessary in autocrossing, however if you're concerned about such issues, you may want to consider a fire extinguisher. Generally a cutoff switch is used for road racing where if the car winds up in a wall or upside down a cut off swich is necessary in this situation. If you wind up upside down or in a wall autocrossing you have more to worry about then just a cut-off swich.

Good luck!

 

Maybe this is just for STS, but I thought the battery had to be put behind the back seats (for hatches) or in the trunk

 

yes the battery has to be mounted behind the rearmost seat to be consided outside of the passenger compartment, since i have removed the rear seats, any where behind the front seats are now consided free game for mounting

well i decided to go for it, i ordered the box and wire earlier today, i've had a thing lately for trying to get the engine bay as clean as posible, so i guess that was a good reason to do it, plus it cant hurt moving some the the weight backwards and lower in the car, I decided to go without an external cutoff switch for now, just too much hassle for a street driven car. also by puting it on the floor dirctly behind the passenger seat doesnt give up an cargo space really for me, the only thing i think it will affect is the seat not being able to go all the way back, thats just too bad for the passenger now isnt it

emwavy: maybe i'll see you at nazerth this weekend if youre going

 

I'm interested in this as well. I have a 94 civic hatch, where I have moved the battery to the back, by the tailgate. I don't run a second seat so I guess I could put the battery down there. Never really thought of it until now. I'm in the shittiest class in my SCCA region so it really doesn't matter what I do. If any of you want custom alum. battery boxes I can get them for you. I'm not sure on a price yet... but if there's interest I'm sure I can work a good deal.

 

My opinion on this is that battery relocation is always a good thing, but it's not gonna change your speed too much. It one of about 20 things that you can do to make the car faster, and in that sense, it's good. If you have never trophied at Nationals, I wouldn't spend any time worrying about the battery location. It's not that important really.
Chris

 

IMO the answer would be no

#1 as you notice your engine sits off to the left. Try putting your car on scales and see what happens when you remove the battery

#2 you lose a tremendous of current throughout the legth of those wires.

#3 adds to the complexity of the car

#4 hey those cable and all the mounting bracket can add another 10-15pounds to the total weight.

#5 On a prepared car you are likely to lose several hundred pounds in the front. Shifting weight to the back only hurts the reason you bought a FWD car in the first place, the way in which it handles

my .10 keep the change

 

I agree with the last post, but the last point hit me weird:

>>#5 On a prepared car you are likely to lose several hundred pounds in the
>> front. Shifting weight to the back only hurts the reason you bought a FWD car
>>in the first place, the way in which it handles

I can't think of a FWD car that is better than 60f/40r weight distribution, and that doesn't usually make for a good handling car. But it brings up an interesting question..... if the weight distribution of a FWD car was 50f/50r, would it work better? The answer I come up with is that it wouldn't accelerate as well in a straight line (less weight where you need traction), but I think it would handle better overall. The theory of tire grip would dictate the car would have higher overall grip. But the dynamics of accelerating out of a turn are making my head hurt. You'd have less weight on the front so acceleration wouldn't be as good, but then again you'd have less weight on the front so it should turn in better (relative to the rear). Know what I mean? And then the question comes up of whether you are running an LSD or not?

I suppose a 50/50 FWD car with an LSD could be really really good. And I think the 50/50 balance of the car and overall tire grip is more important than the grip of the front tires when accelerating; so a non-LSD FWD car is better 50/50 too.

Anyway, that's why that last point hit me a little weird. Any weight change to improve the weight distribution should help I think. And I also don't think FWD cars are purchased "because of the way they handle." They are inferior to RWD, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about that.

Chris
http://www.redshiftmotorsports.com

 

well i guess i might be having a few second thoughts about doing it now, but since i already ordered the box, im going take a closer look at it when it gets here and decide.

i also just ordered a 15lb odyssey battery yesterday, so even if i decide against moving it i'll still be loosing some weight

 

For the majority of people understeer is going to make them faster than oversteer.

A good example is a driving school in FL that used to run Neons and Vipers. 40% of the class could lap faster in the Neons

 

im gona take a crack at this though i dont know if it will come out right, but im all up for learning so here goes

the last post saying that understeer will gennerally be faster then oversteer for most people, i dont think i agree with that for autoxing, im not sure if you ment it just for road courses or for both, if it was not for autoxing then you can stop reading here

everyone that i know autoxing wants to get their car to rotate, not push, from my point of view being that i have an lsd, that if my rear end ends up going too far i can just mash the gas and straighten it out, but if im pushing into a corner about all i can do is let off the gas and hope the tires grip again and start to turn the car, at that point i cant really control it, right? so for autoxing having a car that slightly oversteers is the prefered setup, isn't it? or am i not getting it?

 

well, in my case (02 si) that battery is taking up precious space for a good custom intake (see real-time-racing's rsx intake). So I've got a relocation in the plans for someday.

 

>>For the majority of people understeer is going to make them
>>faster than oversteer. A good example is a driving school in
>>FL that used to run Neons and Vipers. 40% of the class could
>>lap faster in the Neons

ha ha. That is amusing! I never much gave that a thought. So, I guess I wasn't considering Neon vs. Viper.... perhaps there's other things going on there too. Also, I think understeer and oversteer are both bad because they presume excessive amounts of something. Balanced is best. And good balance with the ability to induced controlled oversteer is BY FAR the best autocross car setup. For road racing, I'd say the same thing, but the speeds are higher and the setup is a little difference. Either way, having more even weight on all 4 tires is better than not.

And then you can through aerodynamics into the pot..... Anyone know weight balance of a F1 car at rest and at speed??? My head is starting to hurt again! ha ha

Chris

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mythos EF &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">For the majority of people understeer is going to make them faster than oversteer.

A good example is a driving school in FL that used to run Neons and Vipers. 40% of the class could lap faster in the Neons</TD></TR></TABLE>

Good point, but isn't comparing lap times in a 400hp RR car to a 120hp FF car, driven by novices a little unfair?

 

The point is we are not talking about professional racers here

Everyone is so "I got to get 50/50 F/R" and "I've got to make a FWD handle like a twitchy RWD" they forget they are ametures and will probably be much slower for it. Most people have never been in a car with "neutral handling" even though most of them think in order to be fast they have to get there. A good case is the Turner BMW vs The Realtime RSX. Even with the weights the same the RSX is still faster in the corners probably because it is FWD. FWD is alot more forgiving of mistakes which is easy enough to provide in a racecar

Even sporting 100 kilos of penalty weight the RSX is still faster

 

On the 50/50 thing. Doug Peterson of Comptech commented on this in a FWD book by Jack Doo. They tried this with a some of their race cars a while back and found that FWD handling is crap at 50/50. About 60/40 the best distrubution for FWD according to the article.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Track rat &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">On the 50/50 thing. Doug Peterson of Comptech commented on this in a FWD book by Jack Doo. They tried this with a some of their race cars a while back and found that FWD handling is crap at 50/50. About 60/40 the best distrubution for FWD according to the article. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I've read of some GT class hondas coming to more or less the same conclusions.

 

It goes to show how millions and millions of $ of R&D by Honda has produced a chasis and weight distribution that should be considered supperior and improved on than inferior and shyed away from

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mythos EF &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It goes to show how millions and millions of $ of R&D by Honda has produced a chasis and weight distribution that should be considered supperior and improved on than inferior and shyed away from</TD></TR></TABLE>

Definitely a good point. Something else to support that is the Integra Type R. If 50/50 weight distribution was good for FF then they surely would have done it with the Type R.

 

A bunch of years ago (mid 80s) when Renault was trying their best to break into the US market, and they had that Renault 5 series going, I think it was the Archer Brothers that built a 50/50 weight distribution car, and they said it was totally undriveable. They could not keep the rear end behind the front.