Lightweight Battery?

Only if your OEM specs and group size calls for a 225 CCA capacity. I'd say not.

But, on the other hand, using the proper group size for my 260Z, with the proper CCA rating, I found about a 9.2 lb difference from the heaviest to the lightest battery by comparing about nine different "brands". The reason I use the term "brands" is that clearly some of the batteries were OEMed from a battery company and re-labeled as "Pep Boys" "Advance" and so on. Incidentally these less expensive OEM units were the lighter batteries I found.

Do a bit of research with a scale and I bet you'll find a battery that is lightest of the legal ones available for your car.

Ron
 
I don’t believe that battery is legal either, however I when I needed a new battery I went to the Auto Palace web site and typed in 82 RX7 and found a spread of 20 pounds amongst the recommended batteries.
 
So, what is the official word? It seems like "similar" is way too nebulous. How is the OEM battery weight determined, since most OEM specs will not designate the weight?

Seems like this either needs to be removed, or the wording needs to reworked to make it clear exactly what is required. I would vote for removal, since we already have an overall weight limit.
 
There is no official word and certainly not on this website. The only way to get an official word is to have a protest reach the Court of Appeals and even that is imperfect.
What you can get is a reality check on you position. If you have position and you get support for rational people than you can feel better about pushing the envelope.
 
Yes, i know the process. However, that is not the direction i am going here.

It is obviously that the intent of the rule was that batteries are restricted to w/in a few pounds of the original battery. It is also fairly obvious that the wording of the rule and the reality of the stock specs make enforcement of this rule almost impossible. Thus, as i said, the rule should somehow be re-written, or dropped entirely. I vote for the latter.
 
I disagree. There are many rules that are not easily enforceable, we can't drop all of them. You can name 100 parts with no specs.

And it's a fallicy to say that "similar weight" is pointless because the car has a min weight. It's pretty clear the intent of the rules is to prevent us all from buying $250 batteries every year. If all we are going to do is weight the car and anything else goes, then things get expensive. I know, you don't have to buy the battery, but if you can, then you must. The rule has a purpose. Making it easier to shed weight simply by paying money is what the rules seeks to prevent. By that argument we'll all be running CF hoods next year.

It's also not true to say you can choose the lightest replacement battery. "...similar amp-hour capacity and weight..." That is an AND, not an OR.

I'm not usually a rule nanny, but the intent and goal of the rule seems clear. Don't make me spend more money just to save weight.
 
dickita15 said:
I don’t believe that battery is legal either, however I when I needed a new battery I went to the Auto Palace web site and typed in 82 RX7 and found a spread of 20 pounds amongst the recommended batteries.
Click to expand...

Dick...Do you know if the lighter batteries have less capacity?
Just wondering...in Ham Radio, the more the weight, the better the boat anchor.

Bruce
N1MZI:shrug:
 
There is a 10-15lb spread on battery weight for my car, but that is because the cars with AC came with much larger batteries, and they all come up in a search. I have never seen more than a 5# swing on the same capacity/size battery, and yes the el-cheapo brands are best for this IMO.
 
jumbojimbo said:
I disagree. There are many rules that are not easily enforceable, we can't drop all of them. You can name 100 parts with no specs.

And it's a fallicy to say that "similar weight" is pointless because the car has a min weight. It's pretty clear the intent of the rules is to prevent us all from buying $250 batteries every year. If all we are going to do is weight the car and anything else goes, then things get expensive. I know, you don't have to buy the battery, but if you can, then you must. The rule has a purpose. Making it easier to shed weight simply by paying money is what the rules seeks to prevent. By that argument we'll all be running CF hoods next year.

It's also not true to say you can choose the lightest replacement battery. "...similar amp-hour capacity and weight..." That is an AND, not an OR.

I'm not usually a rule nanny, but the intent and goal of the rule seems clear. Don't make me spend more money just to save weight.
Click to expand...

You are right, the rule is an AND. The rule applies to both the amp-hour and weight of the battery. We are focusing on the weight portion here (if you didn't notice). Which is the portion that is unenforceable (since there is no baseline).

Your argument is that it is ok to have this unenforceable rule, because there are lots of others? It doesn't make any sense that an unenforceable rule is making you pay less money. If it is unenforceable, then people are already paying the money you are worrying about.

The rule should be made enforceable or dropped.
 
jumbojimbo said:
because the car has a min weight.
Click to expand...

Exactly, the car has a minimum weight.

You wish to get to minimum weight with a $250 battery from Pegasus. Bob wants to redesign his cage to lose 15 lbs. Robert wants to lose 15 lbs out of his fat ass. Folks have choices.

The car has a minimum weight. Seems to me that the rule of the battery remaining in the stock location would be enough.
 
My battery (stock) sits over the right rear tire. So, oddly enough, I do the opposite -- I look for a reasonably heavy battery.......

I think the "reasonably equivalent" weight rule probably should go given the wide sread of "stock" batteries and their weights.
 
The rule is not black and white, but the intent is clear to all of us. Maybe it could be written better, but I have full faith that the protest process will win out over a battery that weighs half of stock.

Seems we have bigger fish to fry than this one.
 
I actually wish we could be allowed free batteries, including relocation, for both safety and performance reasons. But I'm not EVEN going to open up that can of worms, officially...
 
Greg Amy said:
I actually wish we could be allowed free batteries, including relocation, for both safety and performance reasons. But I'm not EVEN going to open up that can of worms, officially...
Click to expand...

So would I, but for completely selfish reasons like more weight back with my cool suit, and cleaner line to fresh air in my engine bay. :D
 
shwah said:
The rule is not black and white, but the intent is clear to all of us. Maybe it could be written better, but I have full faith that the protest process will win out over a battery that weighs half of stock.

Seems we have bigger fish to fry than this one.
Click to expand...

Ding, ding, ding - we have a winner!

Rules enforcement is an entirely different arm of the Club, than is rules writing. Just like with the US legal system, actual Right and Wrong are defined by the judiciary (protest and appeals).

Safety, convenience, cost, etc. can all serve as rationale for replacing ANY part on our cars. Making it OK for the battery just moves us to the next opportunity for creep.

K
 
Maybe the club has some secret file of OEM battery weights and is just waiting to pounce when someone files a protest. I am definately not in favor of rules that are not clearly spelled out. Don't have a rule that says must be stock unless you can define what stock is, and then share that with us, so we can know that we are kosher. Makes an old Quality man like me stumble and mumble!

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top