CF tub weight vs. FG?

[g8kam]

I agreed with DP, I rather spend the money for a full titanium exhaust system including the manifold, must be considerable amount of weight savings(20lb+), improves weight distribution, not to mention it look and sound nicer too!!!

[dp]

the stock stainless system is not too bad actually - i doubt that there's 20 lbs to be saved there.  5, maybe.

the only useful weight savings in the atom (again just my opinion) is getting the lightest wheels you can find.  SSR comps (now called type C) are nice at about 10-11 lbs each depending on size. 

personally i plan on spending the money on trackdays

[g8kam]

5lbs is a bit pessimistic. I had a yam R1 before, by changing the std silencer to the Akrapovic titanium back box alone, I saved about 2kg(4lbs+), can't remember the exact figure.

[iwantanatom]

Even if there is minimal weight savings for the CF tub, would it substantially increase structural rigidity, which of course, would help suspension and handling? Is the CF tub attached to the chassis in way that would clearly reduce frame flex?
The bremmo description seems to imply this by saying "Replace the standard fiberglass chassis â??tubâ?� with a structural, lightweight carbon fiber unit."

[Bruce Fielding]

[quote="iwantanatom"]
Even if there is minimal weight savings for the CF tub, would it substantially increase structural rigidity, which of course, would help suspension and handling? Is the CF tub attached to the chassis in way that would clearly reduce frame flex?
The bremmo description seems to imply this by saying "Replace the standard fiberglass chassis â??tubâ?� with a structural, lightweight carbon fiber unit."


[/quote]

Unlike most road cars, the Atom is made from socking great steel bars! It hardly flexes at all -  with or without a tub

[John Lloyd]

[quote="iwantanatom"]
Even if there is minimal weight savings for the CF tub, would it substantially increase structural rigidity, which of course, would help suspension and handling? Is the CF tub attached to the chassis in way that would clearly reduce frame flex?
The bremmo description seems to imply this by saying "Replace the standard fiberglass chassis â??tubâ?� with a structural, lightweight carbon fiber unit."


[/quote]

Proof reading went wrong and they meant "structurally"  ie its the tub thats structurally sound not enhancing the car. 

[dp]

considering that the tub attaches to the frame with just a few small bolts, no matter how strong it is it can't carry much load - the bolts would just shear off and/or tear the composite. 

the tub is only there to keep you from doing a fred flintstone

[Myerfire48]

I doubt the weight savings would justify the cost.  Think of it more along the lines of jewelery.  Carbon Fiber is man bling.