toys Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I've done a search for this, but could find nothing conclusive... Just received a new set of four GRP wings (black gel coat) and weighed them - they came to a total of 4.2 kg. I'm curious to know what the equivalent bare CF set would weigh? I would guess that you might save 2 kg with carbon, but does anyone have any definitive numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normans_Ghost Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I would guess that the saving is more than that. The DITP wings I fitted recently felt weightless. When I picked up the GRP wings I was amazed just how heavy they were. With cf wing, nosecone and full ineterior (boot as well) and 2 low back tillets I've save over 40kgs. norman verona 1989 BDR 220bhp Mem No 2166 Curmudgeon in an Elise, (and 7 and Elan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibrepro Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I can weigh the cf ones for you when I get to work tomorrow if you like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Carbon fibre weights vary considerably depending on the layup type, material and resin system: Tillet carbon uses Resin Transfer Moulding (RTM) uses a male and female mould and injects resin in the gap. This uses a greater resin quantity than autoclave production hence components are heavier. MOG etc use a wet layup which again uses excess resin as low resin content laminates cannot usually be achieved without the incorporation of excessive quantities of voids. So again weight is increased, together with reduced resin flexibility resulting in premature cracking under stress. Autoclave cured pre-preg provides the best weight/strength ratio which is why is is used exclusively in high strength/low mass applications such as F1 cars and aeroplane wings etc. I just weighed an offside carbon rear wing to the spec my new company will be manufacturing and it weighs 562 grams. I think your 4.2kg may be a little inaccurate - what did you wight them with? Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibrepro Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Just for the record, Tilletts do not use RTM on CF components, we use vacuum infusion technology which in fact only uses the amount of resin required by the fibres in the moulding. We have found that the weight is less than that of some pre-preg components and exactly the same as others, give or take a few grammes. But never heavier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toys Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 Thanks Fibrepro - it will be good to nail this once and for all. Arnie - I weighed them with digital kitchen scales. Can't believe that it would be more than 0.1kg out... Edited by - toys on 29 Jun 2004 18:12:49 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Totally unlike RTM then? Lets see.... Fabrics are laid up as a dry stack of materials as in RTM. Unlike RTM the fibre stack is then covered with peel ply and a knitted type of non-structural fabric. So its like one half of the RTM process then - fact. The whole dry stack is then vacuum bagged, and once bag leaks have been eliminated, resin is allowed to flow into the laminate. The resin distribution over the whole laminate is aided by resin flowing easily through the non-structural fabric, and wetting the fabric out from above. No excess resin?? I think not. Professional carbon shops view vacuum infusion technology as a means of using wet layup tools to get slightly better results. No match for pre-preg though. Low viscosity resins used in vacuum infusion technology also comprising mechanical properties. Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibrepro Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember stating that Vacuum infusion was totally unlike RTM. In fact it is, as you have kindly pointed out, very similar apart from the resin being drawn into the fibres through vacuum rather than injected. As for the peel-ply, I feel you may have got your wires crossed somewhere along the line. The only peel-ply used by us is for wet lay GRP Kart seats. And there are no vac bags involved in infusion by the way. "Knitted type of non structural fabric." I am assuming you are refering to certain types of flow media used to direct the flow of resin. I'm not going to comment on the lay-up of components but will say that none of the materials used in our products compromise structure or performance in any way. Low viscous resins? Where? Professional composite shops- I reckon Tilletts falls into this category. With over £2million turnover pa in CF products alone, we must be doing something right. But, hey. I'm not going to get into an argument over whats the best, we could be here all night. I feel that each process has it's pro's and con's and after all, I think Toys is probably after a simple answer to a simple question. Toys. I will give you the figures asap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemesis Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 HANDBAGS!!!! Nemesis Click here ARE YOU STUUPIDD I EM THE LAWE, I EM IN CHERGE ERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singlespeeder Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 What?CF ones. 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheds Moderator Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Did you spill my pint? Yeah, you, I'm talking to you. Did you spill my f- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toys Posted July 1, 2004 Author Share Posted July 1, 2004 OK, getting back to the original point The information I have now equates to a weight saving of 1.8kg for the set of four wings. Most of us (me included) would have though it would be more I'm sure. Lets not kid ourselves here though - we specify carbon for the looks / kudos, and justify the cost (£800 more for the set) by talking about the weight saving. If anyone else has any measured values to back up (or contradict) mine I would be keen to hear them. 'I picked one up and it felt much lighter' comments are not scientific enough for me I'm afraid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bare Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Silly Boys.. argueing about Foolish Stuff. Who Bloody cares ? IF weight is that important.. run a Half tank of Fuel.. lessee ..at 8lbs per gallon you could save 16lbs simply by not filling the last 2 Gallons.. for NO COST Whatsoever. Makes paying for CF bits seem rather Foolish.. at least in my World :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 A genuine Caterham offside CF rear wing weighs 1055 grams - on my scale at least. Would imagine a DITP wing would be lighter - and not limiting the operational range of the car as suggested above /r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Mmm... not interested in your agurement about who does what and mine is better attitude, let's concentrate on the point of carbon fibre and it's inherent strength to weight ratio, this being the original question. Support the 7 Society...... Ehhh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leadership Team SLR No.77 Posted July 4, 2004 Leadership Team Share Posted July 4, 2004 Caterham supplied glass fibre rear wings are now much lighter than they were some years ago. The same applies to their CF products. The fact is that the weights vary massively, and I've been reliably informed that some of the Ctareham issue CF wings are in fact lighter than DiTP items. Weight is however only part of the equation. If fitness for purpose is addressed, the stength of the wing is as important as the weight - when I renewed my '95 glass wings in '02, I discovered that the new glass wings were sustaining damage at a much faster rate than the originals, leading me to be concerned that the weight had been reduced a little too far and the new wings would be a disaster area after a couple of years. I therefore switched to carbon knowing that it is far more difficult to damage. In doing so, I currently have 2 sets of carbon rears, and again there is a big difference in weight between the 2 sets. Stu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Stu, As you have posted this on a public forum perhaps you would be kind enough to email the name of the person who made this study. Thx. Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Westermann Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 @ Bare: You tell the truth. And for me I can save further 20 kg if I find a way coming down to the 70 kg of my team mate. ☹️ And stop to drink my really like beer is no way for me I start with own carbon products because I like the carbon style but I cant pay the carbon on market. Save weight was definitive not the cause for that because in the Caterham Challenges I have to drive with my Vauxhall engine with a handicap weight! But last saturday I visit Freestyle. I had a DITP nose cone in my hand. And what a surprise! Our nose cone is by a smoothlier surface lighter than the DITP nose cone. ( and not so expensive ) 😬 @Arnie Perhaps you should send your employees to Germany for some lessons in high quality wet-laminating. I believe German coaches are at a premium at the moment." Regards Joachim www.mog-racing.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singlespeeder Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 .... but only if they coach another countries team 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 Is the DITP nose cone not a lot stronger due to the construction ? Anthony Raceco can on and it looks stunning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 Joachim, That was a £250 nosecone made for Joe Raccaggna you were holding. Made cheap and not by DITP's usual supplier but by Neil Blunden. He makes carbon bits under subcon from DPS for your countrymans Ferrari. I am sure therefore that his work is crap. There is a new kid on the block and you and Caterham are about to be seriously undercut. Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Edited by - EFA on 5 Jul 2004 14:15:58 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toys Posted July 5, 2004 Author Share Posted July 5, 2004 I only asked about weights. Didn't mean to start WW3..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 Sorry Toys, You can lock threads you know 😬 Joachim and I enjoy arguing, but we never mention the war for that would be improper. Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V7 SLR Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 I saw a pair of Joachim's seats recently. Very nice..!! I also have the full set of DitP wings and nose. Also very nice..!! My friend has the latest Tillets for the SV which are a league ahead of the original sized ones in terms of rigidity and they are a more sensible fit around the back/kidneys. Love them, but can't get them into a normal Se7en. Perhaps leaving the back area flat as per the SV but bring in the wings a little to allow them to fit into a normal Se7en? I'd have a set then. Now I think I'm going to buy a pair of those carbon headlamp bowls I've seen advertised by Henk. I've seen his work previously and it's fantastic. So... I'm glad you're all in the game chaps. I just hope your competition is constructive and that you continue to offer top quality parts at value prices. Good luck to you all. *thumbup* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 Cheaper carbon components, mmmm... nothing like promoting a price war Arnie, 😳 all the better for the consumer.! 😬 Support the 7 Society...... Ehhh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now