I was curious about the weight of my 1951 F-1 and in the process of ordering coil overs for the 4-link conversion I'll do in the next month or two.

This is with 6.2L aluminum engine, 6L80 - 6 speed automatic, with AC, Dodge Caravan rear bench seat installed and Heidt's IFS. Almost no gas in the truck and battery mounted between the frame rails next to the fuel tank.

Front 1770 - 54.6%
Rear 1470 - 45.4%
Total 3240 lbs.

Was kind of surprised by the front / rear ratio (that it is not more nose heavy). I did mount the engine and trans as far back as possible. And the 6L80 is a large, long and heavy transmission probably nearly in the center of the truck.

Interestingly, I measured the center of the bench seat (fore and aft), it is 3" closer to the rear axle than the front.

Anyone have similar data to share?

Doug

 

A cast iron engine would add about 1-200 # to the nose and you and an adult passenger would bring the front/rear ratio closer to 60-40 % The F1 has a longer wheelbase than an F100 which also helps the F1's balance. Good to know info tho!

 

I agree with the iron engine comments.

I measured the bench seat location. It is several inches closer to the rear axle than the front axle, which might be counter-intuitive.

Based on that, with passengers, I think I'll actually become closer to 50/50!

Doug

 

Wow. I would have expected a little more than that but I guess the all aluminum engine helped that size monster not weigh so much. Good info.

 

I haven't done a F/R split test on mine, but it consistently weighs in at 3050 with a fair amount of gas in it, and with that "boat anchor" flat V8.

 

From the F1 6.5 ft bed 1948 Ford Truck Handbook
This is with V8 , water and fuel & 6.00x16 4 ply

Front - 1890
Rear - 1345
Total - 3235
Payload - 765 lbs

 

My HS physics teacher would argue with your math. Adding a couple hefty passengers, even several inches rearward of center the change in weight distribution on a 118" WB would be ~ 1/10 of 1%.

 

F-1 wheelbase is 114".

I agree tho, the seat is close enough to center that you're adding to both F & R pretty evenly.

 

Not trying to stir up a pi$$ing contest, but is .1% not closer to 50/50? All I wrote was closer to 50/50.

I did measure my wheelbase as it sits: 113". I did not install the Heidt's IFS, so perhaps that repositioned the wheelbase?

I measured about where my A$$ sits on the seat. That is about 55" from the rear axle center.

I suspect your HS physics teacher didn't read my statement so well.

Either way, no worries and we are splitting hairs and thanks a bunch for all of your comments!!


Doug

 

It's all about weights, arms, and moments.

Using the 114" wheelbase and the weights that you've given, your CG is located 51.7" aft of the front axle.

If you add 2ea 200# guys in the bench seat that is 60" aft of the front axle, the CG will move to 52.6" aft of the front axle (so less than 1 inch). As both Albuq and Ax are saying, with the seat so close to the CG, it won't change much. The fuel won't have much more effect either....that is, if you have a stock tank in the cab. Putting heavy items in the bed is another story.

Dan

 

With four wheels on the ground you don't really have to worry about CG but if your flying a small airplane pay attention to it.
Every thread needs a smart a$s comment once in a while

 

We are safely all on the same page.

My fuel tank is mounted about 12" in front of the rear bumper, kind of like the Pinto . I had 2 gallons about at the time of weighing. I intend one day to build a larger fuel tank. Perhaps I'll work to build a tank so that when it is full, I can truly have 50/50 weight ratio! GULP.... and then my moment of Inertia would increase significantly.

Presently, I can onboard about 12 gallons, only. Good thing I have a modern engine and 6 speed automatic trans. I can make it a bit further between fuel stops ~ 150 miles, now. I take on 10 gallons each time I stop, about.

thanks for all of the comments!

Doug

 

I apologize! You are correct sir it would be closer by a miniscule amount, and the F1 wheelbase is 114" not 118". I am a bit touchy about claims of 50-50 weight distribution claims since that is the holy grail of road racers and autocrossers and is extremely hard to actually achieve in a front engined street vehicle like a 2 seat sports car, and nearly impossible in a pickup. The designers/engineers at Mazda spent a couple years of hair pulling and teeth gnashing to get the Miata to within 10# of 50-50 empty and without passengers (curb weight) as well as keeping the polar moments as close to the CG as possible while keeping the car light, using such extremes as an aluminum hood, gas tank located on the CG and lightweight battery recessed in the trunk. That's why the Miata is a far better handling whole than the sum of it's parts would suggest. My Solstice is 52-48% with me on board and minimal gas.

 

Hi Chuck,
I hear you. And agree. Apology accepted and totally unnecessary.

I was a bit surprised by the balance myself. Maybe the moving company's scale is screwed up!

Handling isn't critical here. I have a bench seat!! Just kind of nice to know it isn't totally out of whack.

Doug