Rotating weight savings claim...

[TominMO]

Certainly the weight savings in wheels/tires will have an effect on handling and braking, i.e. lighter is better; but a weight savings if 16 lbs is just that. I think that 64 lb number is some sort of equivalency formula, for a straight-line braking situation; but it wouldn't have anything to do with damper rebound. Taking 64 lbs out of the sprung weight, like removing seats, spare tire, etc., won't make the unsprung weight (wheel, tire, hub) work any better.

[FestYboy]

now wait Tom, you gotta remember that once that weight is moving, it's static equivilant changes. ever see kids in a sience museum sit on a stool and with no other force working on them, are able to spin on said chair by holding a spinning bicycle wheel? same principles apply in a car. so yes it DOES affect damper/spring rates, requires braking force, and cornering grip/turn in/feel.

[eurotiva]

My wheels weigh 38 lbs each with tires

[TominMO]

now wait Tom, you gotta remember that once that weight is moving, it's static equivilant changes. ever see kids in a sience museum sit on a stool and with no other force working on them, are able to spin on said chair by holding a spinning bicycle wheel? same principles apply in a car. so yes it DOES affect damper/spring rates, requires braking force, and cornering grip/turn in/feel.

I will grant you that another 64 lbs of sprung weight will compress the four springs a tiny amount; but other than that you're still dealing with the heavier tire/wheel, which will resist movement in a new direction (up/down, and faster to slower or vice versa) more so than a lighter combo. The wheel/tire weight is much more important than sprung weight, when we are talking about small numbers like this.

A stock 12" tire/wheel weighs about 23 lbs. My 14"ers weigh 30 lbs each, for a total difference for four wheels of 28 lbs. I'd much rather reduce wheel weight than sprung weight for better response. 28 extra pounds of rotating mass will take longer to stop than just having a 28-lb toolbox in the car, for example.

[bhazard]

There's a reason Honda used 9lb wheels on the VX, and it wasn't for looks or acceleration.

[TominMO]

There's a reason Honda used 9lb wheels on the VX, and it wasn't for looks or acceleration.

Although lighter wheels of course help acceleration, as well as gas mileage from a stop to cruising speed.

[Aaronbrook37]

Although lighter wheels of course help acceleration, as well as gas mileage from a stop to cruising speed.

Agreed.

[tecnopolis]

I just wanted to know what the 12" alloys weigh -vs- the 12" steel rims. Without Tires.

[FestYboy]

Certainly the weight savings in wheels/tires will have an effect on handling and braking, i.e. lighter is better; but a weight savings if 16 lbs is just that. I think that 64 lb number is some sort of equivalency formula, for a straight-line braking situation; but it wouldn't have anything to do with damper rebound.

I will grant you that another 64 lbs of sprung weight will compress the four springs a tiny amount; but other than that you're still dealing with the heavier tire/wheel, which will resist movement in a new direction (up/down, and faster to slower or vice versa) more so than a lighter combo. The wheel/tire weight is much more important than sprung weight, when we are talking about small numbers like this.

A stock 12" tire/wheel weighs about 23 lbs. My 14"ers weigh 30 lbs each, for a total difference for four wheels of 28 lbs. I'd much rather reduce wheel weight than sprung weight for better response. 28 extra pounds of rotating mass will take longer to stop than just having a 28-lb toolbox in the car, for example.

sry, i didn't specify what was moving... i was refering to the rotating wheels only and in responce to your earlier post as i read it.
i aggree that reducing unsprung weight is paramount for all aspects of performance and that the claim in the original post is true (to an extent).