| Davenow | 02-28-2007 09:18 AM |
Canards.... Effective or purely bling?
�
�
I am asking this in the motorsports forum because I want opions from guys who would actually have some frame of reference or experience when it comes to aero issues at speed.
So I am looking to pick up a bit more high speed stability on the miotter.
My suspension is already set up well, dampers tweaked as much as I can tweak them (Illumina 5 ways).
The MSM already comes from the factory with a brace under it connecting the frame rails (essentially anyway) and I have a rollbar, so I dont think any more stiffening is going to help things. I am on Azenis, and my wheels are 14lbs each.
My 05 STI picked up a good bit of stability above 80mph when I installed the V limited lip, so I was thinking a bit of aero help could also help the miata.
SO... I dont want to go to some big ricer wing, although if there was something tasteful that actually worked in the 80+mph range I would at least consider it. I was thinking of a set of canards. APR makes them in several shapes and I can print out the template to find ones that fit.
BUT, how effective are they? I know without a wind tunnel you cant nail down aero issues, but I also know that there are TONS of successful track guys running big wings and front lips and such effectively, without having gone into a wind tunnel. Although when the top is down, I doubt there is any point whatsoever to any kind of wing beyond a small (maybe slightly larger than the stock) trunk lip spolier.
So what do you guys think?
For reference, here are a couple pics of my car
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/davenow/IMG_6120-01.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/davenow/IMG_5750.jpg[/IMG]
So I am looking to pick up a bit more high speed stability on the miotter.
My suspension is already set up well, dampers tweaked as much as I can tweak them (Illumina 5 ways).
The MSM already comes from the factory with a brace under it connecting the frame rails (essentially anyway) and I have a rollbar, so I dont think any more stiffening is going to help things. I am on Azenis, and my wheels are 14lbs each.
My 05 STI picked up a good bit of stability above 80mph when I installed the V limited lip, so I was thinking a bit of aero help could also help the miata.
SO... I dont want to go to some big ricer wing, although if there was something tasteful that actually worked in the 80+mph range I would at least consider it. I was thinking of a set of canards. APR makes them in several shapes and I can print out the template to find ones that fit.
BUT, how effective are they? I know without a wind tunnel you cant nail down aero issues, but I also know that there are TONS of successful track guys running big wings and front lips and such effectively, without having gone into a wind tunnel. Although when the top is down, I doubt there is any point whatsoever to any kind of wing beyond a small (maybe slightly larger than the stock) trunk lip spolier.
So what do you guys think?
For reference, here are a couple pics of my car
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/davenow/IMG_6120-01.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/davenow/IMG_5750.jpg[/IMG]
| eclip5e | 02-28-2007 09:32 AM |
They do actually produce downforce up front, if properly designed and configured with your front end, otherwise it could be producing useless drag.
| Mechie3 | 02-28-2007 09:49 AM |
What about an APR style front diffuser? Canards do develop downforce. The hard part is getting them to be efficient and create enough down force without inducing large amounts of drag.
| STiShawn | 02-28-2007 09:52 AM |
you'd probably gain more from a front splitter then canards. The rule of thumb for a splitter is for the chord to be twice the ride height at the bottom of the front lip. Most series however dictate that it not extend past the bumpers "shadow line".
| eclip5e | 02-28-2007 09:54 AM |
[QUOTE=Mechie3;17207259]What about an APR style front diffuser? Canards do develop downforce. The hard part is getting them to be efficient and create enough down force without inducing large amounts of drag.[/QUOTE]
isn't that what i said?
isn't that what i said?
| Patrick Olsen | 02-28-2007 08:42 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17206969]SO... I dont want to go to some big ricer wing, although if there was something tasteful that actually worked in the 80+mph range I would at least consider it. I was thinking of a set of canards.[/quote]
I presume the car is pretty well balanced now, in which case adding canards to give you more grip up front without doing anything at the rear is just going to make the car more unstable at speed.
[quote=Davenow]Although when the top is down, I doubt there is any point whatsoever to any kind of wing beyond a small (maybe slightly larger than the stock) trunk lip spolier.[/quote]
Actually, I would think just the opposite. The open roof with the rollbar sticking up probably dirties up the air quite a bit, so you'd need a wing up off the trunk to get into "good" air to be useful. At least, that's my hunch. You should do some yarn testing with the top down and a camera mounted to the rollbar looking at yarn tufts on your trunk, might be pretty fun to play around with. Anyway, a big wing may not be something you'd want to keep on the car all the time, but if you were really motivated you could find a junkyard trunk lid and put the wing on that, just swap it on for track days.
[QUOTE=eclip5e;17207315]isn't that what i said?[/QUOTE]
So people aren't allowed to say things to corroborate what you said?
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
I presume the car is pretty well balanced now, in which case adding canards to give you more grip up front without doing anything at the rear is just going to make the car more unstable at speed.
[quote=Davenow]Although when the top is down, I doubt there is any point whatsoever to any kind of wing beyond a small (maybe slightly larger than the stock) trunk lip spolier.[/quote]
Actually, I would think just the opposite. The open roof with the rollbar sticking up probably dirties up the air quite a bit, so you'd need a wing up off the trunk to get into "good" air to be useful. At least, that's my hunch. You should do some yarn testing with the top down and a camera mounted to the rollbar looking at yarn tufts on your trunk, might be pretty fun to play around with. Anyway, a big wing may not be something you'd want to keep on the car all the time, but if you were really motivated you could find a junkyard trunk lid and put the wing on that, just swap it on for track days.
[QUOTE=eclip5e;17207315]isn't that what i said?[/QUOTE]
So people aren't allowed to say things to corroborate what you said?
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
| PA04STI | 02-28-2007 08:53 PM |
[QUOTE=Patrick Olsen;17215757]
Actually, I would think just the opposite. The open roof with the rollbar sticking up probably dirties up the air quite a bit, so you'd need a wing up off the trunk to get into "good" air to be useful. At least, that's my hunch. You should do some yarn testing with the top down and a camera mounted to the rollbar looking at yarn tufts on your trunk, might be pretty fun to play around with. Anyway, a big wing may not be something you'd want to keep on the car all the time, but if you were really motivated you could find a junkyard trunk lid and put the wing on that, just swap it on for track days.[/QUOTE]
I agree ^I would get a hard top every spec miata has one and I know its for one reason more aerodynamic for smoother airflow.
Also proper canards would definitely work look at the Cyber Evo, Crawford STi, & AMS Evo... But its got to be wind tunnel tested to work... or yes I agree with Pat drag will be your friend
Matt
Actually, I would think just the opposite. The open roof with the rollbar sticking up probably dirties up the air quite a bit, so you'd need a wing up off the trunk to get into "good" air to be useful. At least, that's my hunch. You should do some yarn testing with the top down and a camera mounted to the rollbar looking at yarn tufts on your trunk, might be pretty fun to play around with. Anyway, a big wing may not be something you'd want to keep on the car all the time, but if you were really motivated you could find a junkyard trunk lid and put the wing on that, just swap it on for track days.[/QUOTE]
I agree ^I would get a hard top every spec miata has one and I know its for one reason more aerodynamic for smoother airflow.
Also proper canards would definitely work look at the Cyber Evo, Crawford STi, & AMS Evo... But its got to be wind tunnel tested to work... or yes I agree with Pat drag will be your friend
Matt
| solo-x | 02-28-2007 09:23 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17206969]My suspension is already set up well, dampers tweaked as much as I can tweak them (Illumina 5 ways).[/QUOTE]
This made me laugh. I'm sorry, but you're quite far from a well setup suspension. Better shocks will do more to improve the stability of your car then canards will. Bonus, you won't get a huge drag penalty with better suspension like you would with canards either.
This made me laugh. I'm sorry, but you're quite far from a well setup suspension. Better shocks will do more to improve the stability of your car then canards will. Bonus, you won't get a huge drag penalty with better suspension like you would with canards either.
| solo-x | 02-28-2007 09:35 PM |
[QUOTE=PA04STI;17215888]Also proper canards would definitely work look at the Cyber Evo, Crawford STi, & AMS Evo... But its got to be wind tunnel tested to work... or yes I agree with Pat drag will be your friend[/QUOTE]
Canards are just freakin awesome for generating drag with minimal gain. You don't get very good lift to drag ratios when you're beating the air to death. Regardless, at 80mph even an F1 wing package doesn't build much downforce.
Canards are just freakin awesome for generating drag with minimal gain. You don't get very good lift to drag ratios when you're beating the air to death. Regardless, at 80mph even an F1 wing package doesn't build much downforce.
| grippgoat | 02-28-2007 10:16 PM |
[QUOTE=Patrick Olsen;17215757]Anyway, a big wing may not be something you'd want to keep on the car all the time, but if you were really motivated you could find a junkyard trunk lid and put the wing on that, just swap it on for track days.[/QUOTE]
+1 on that... If you're actually having aero instability rear wing is probably the first thing needed (keep the back end planted at higher speeds), and throwing it on a junkyard trunk for track days is probably the best bet if you're ricer-sensitive. But look around the miata boards, as I think you might be able to find something tasteful that'll still work. Something like the S202 wing would probably be good.
I do have a miata, but it's only normally aspirated, so it doesn't go fast enough to have high speed cornering stability issues. :) I'm only at 105-110mph through turn 1 at Pacific Raceways, which isn't fast enough to be remotely scary. Turns 10 and 11 at Portland could be an issue, but I haven't gotten it on track down there yet.
What springs and swaybars are you running? Spec miatas (and my Tein Flex) are set up very front stiff. I think Spec Miata is something like 700f/350r, and my flex are 500f/330r, with a big front bar. This setup understeers quite a bit in steady state, but it's stable, and allows for aggressive trail-braking and full (NA) throttle through the corner. It does make it less fun around town, though (but the turbo might compensate for that).
Also, are you sure you're not overly bottoming-out your rear shocks during hard cornering, making it less stable?
-Mike
+1 on that... If you're actually having aero instability rear wing is probably the first thing needed (keep the back end planted at higher speeds), and throwing it on a junkyard trunk for track days is probably the best bet if you're ricer-sensitive. But look around the miata boards, as I think you might be able to find something tasteful that'll still work. Something like the S202 wing would probably be good.
I do have a miata, but it's only normally aspirated, so it doesn't go fast enough to have high speed cornering stability issues. :) I'm only at 105-110mph through turn 1 at Pacific Raceways, which isn't fast enough to be remotely scary. Turns 10 and 11 at Portland could be an issue, but I haven't gotten it on track down there yet.
What springs and swaybars are you running? Spec miatas (and my Tein Flex) are set up very front stiff. I think Spec Miata is something like 700f/350r, and my flex are 500f/330r, with a big front bar. This setup understeers quite a bit in steady state, but it's stable, and allows for aggressive trail-braking and full (NA) throttle through the corner. It does make it less fun around town, though (but the turbo might compensate for that).
Also, are you sure you're not overly bottoming-out your rear shocks during hard cornering, making it less stable?
-Mike
| STi-MAN | 02-28-2007 10:30 PM |
[QUOTE=solo-x;17216392]Canards are just freakin awesome for generating drag with minimal gain. You don't get very good lift to drag ratios when you're beating the air to death. Regardless, at 80mph even an F1 wing package doesn't build much downforce.[/QUOTE]
I dont know baout minimal gains since the fastest time attack cars all run some sort of canards. Also the wing comment is pretty general.
I dont know baout minimal gains since the fastest time attack cars all run some sort of canards. Also the wing comment is pretty general.
| JMS Landshark | 03-01-2007 07:20 AM |
if they are pretty useless then DTM manufacturer's teams must be doing something wrong.
[IMG]http://static.flickr.com/48/139259919_fc026c4d6f_m.jpg[/IMG]
They can be useful, but I would focus on a hardtop, front splitter, and rear wing first if you want to work on aero.
[IMG]http://static.flickr.com/48/139259919_fc026c4d6f_m.jpg[/IMG]
They can be useful, but I would focus on a hardtop, front splitter, and rear wing first if you want to work on aero.
| solo-x | 03-01-2007 07:30 AM |
[QUOTE=STi-MAN;17217047]I dont know baout minimal gains since the fastest time attack cars all run some sort of canards. Also the wing comment is pretty general.[/QUOTE]
Time attack cars would not be my first place to look for effective innovation. Your typical time attack car is owned by someone with tons of money, but not necessarily tons of driving skill or a knack for car setup. Thats just my opinion. However, my comments on canards stem from a partial understanding of aero dynamics.
A canard works by deflecting the air upwards. This creates tons of turbulence which means tons of drag. Along with that, the turbulence reduces the effective area of the wing because the air flowing over, under, and around the canard is not laminar.
If you look at very effecient wing designs, you'll notice they don't build much downforce at low speeds. A wing design that does generate a lot of downforce at low speeds is also going to generate a lot of drag. Thats the nature of the beast. The AM specials you see at solo events have 20sq/ft of wing area at their disposal. They've got over 200whp. They are aerodynamically limited to somewhere around 60-65mph. Their wings only generate a couple hundred pounds of downforce. A canard on the other hand might generate 2-3lbs of downforce (my bet is they'll do less then that, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here) yet still burn up 15-20hp with added drag. (again, benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't be surprised if they burned up 30hp or more at 90mph)
A splitter/wing combination is going to get you much better downforce while reducing drag (if you size the rear wing correctly). I think the OP needs to first go back and figure out if this is aero instability (I doubt it) or mechanical instability (that's where my money is). Illumina's and some springs are not going to be sufficient. Especially with how low that car is.
Time attack cars would not be my first place to look for effective innovation. Your typical time attack car is owned by someone with tons of money, but not necessarily tons of driving skill or a knack for car setup. Thats just my opinion. However, my comments on canards stem from a partial understanding of aero dynamics.
A canard works by deflecting the air upwards. This creates tons of turbulence which means tons of drag. Along with that, the turbulence reduces the effective area of the wing because the air flowing over, under, and around the canard is not laminar.
If you look at very effecient wing designs, you'll notice they don't build much downforce at low speeds. A wing design that does generate a lot of downforce at low speeds is also going to generate a lot of drag. Thats the nature of the beast. The AM specials you see at solo events have 20sq/ft of wing area at their disposal. They've got over 200whp. They are aerodynamically limited to somewhere around 60-65mph. Their wings only generate a couple hundred pounds of downforce. A canard on the other hand might generate 2-3lbs of downforce (my bet is they'll do less then that, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here) yet still burn up 15-20hp with added drag. (again, benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't be surprised if they burned up 30hp or more at 90mph)
A splitter/wing combination is going to get you much better downforce while reducing drag (if you size the rear wing correctly). I think the OP needs to first go back and figure out if this is aero instability (I doubt it) or mechanical instability (that's where my money is). Illumina's and some springs are not going to be sufficient. Especially with how low that car is.
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 10:13 AM |
actually most wings are effective at any road speed over 40mph. Wing area is not as important as wing angle, wing design, and how much clean air it gets. Canards, or deviations, are not so much for high-speed stability as they are more suited to aiding low-speed front grip, and are mainly used to balance the rear wing. All aero tuning is a balancing act and you MUST be sensible in your approach. Adding a wing will aid high-speed stability, but that must be balanced with an effective front splitter or ground plane,deviations(canards), flow-through hood, front or side diffussers, etc. Wind fences etc will also help.
Personally on a miata I would run a front groundplane as far back as possible, a decently sized and designed rear wing, and add a little rake, maybe a degree, to the car.
True story- I once had a friend with a C4 Corvette that thought the aero packaging we did on the PCA and SWC cars was all for show. He had however put a wing on the Vette for trackdays. The first trackday at a Super Speeday infield road course he was telling me how he thought the wing wasnt doing much, since it was literally a cheap POC aluminum wing. Wanting him to learn a lesson about not getting caught up in the "ricer" BS, I encouraged him to remove the wing for a session. The car was literally unable to perform as it had before, and he was shocked at how much that little crappy wing had been helping him. He put it on and never made fun of wings again.
So, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing.
Personally on a miata I would run a front groundplane as far back as possible, a decently sized and designed rear wing, and add a little rake, maybe a degree, to the car.
True story- I once had a friend with a C4 Corvette that thought the aero packaging we did on the PCA and SWC cars was all for show. He had however put a wing on the Vette for trackdays. The first trackday at a Super Speeday infield road course he was telling me how he thought the wing wasnt doing much, since it was literally a cheap POC aluminum wing. Wanting him to learn a lesson about not getting caught up in the "ricer" BS, I encouraged him to remove the wing for a session. The car was literally unable to perform as it had before, and he was shocked at how much that little crappy wing had been helping him. He put it on and never made fun of wings again.
So, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing.
| Draken | 03-01-2007 11:18 AM |
[QUOTE=solo-x]
A canard works by deflecting the air upwards. This creates tons of turbulence which means tons of drag. Along with that, the turbulence reduces the effective area of the wing because the air flowing over, under, and around the canard is not laminar.
If you look at very effecient wing designs, you'll notice they don't build much downforce at low speeds. A wing design that does generate a lot of downforce at low speeds is also going to generate a lot of drag. Thats the nature of the beast. The AM specials you see at solo events have 20sq/ft of wing area at their disposal. They've got over 200whp. They are aerodynamically limited to somewhere around 60-65mph. Their wings only generate a couple hundred pounds of downforce. A canard on the other hand might generate 2-3lbs of downforce (my bet is they'll do less then that, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here) yet still burn up 15-20hp with added drag. (again, benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't be surprised if they burned up 30hp or more at 90mph)
[/QUOTE]
Jeepers...it is posts like this that really show how much you guess at stuff sometimes. You might want to pay a little more attention to the AM cars when they run, lord knows you have plenty of them in NER. I've personally seen a few of the BC, Canada AM cars well over 100mph, without changing their wing setup from the 50-60mph practice courses the morning of. And you might want to take a few basic aero classes at your local school. 15-20whp of drag for a couple canards? HA! I think I just heard Bernuli turn over in his grave.
Davenow: Rear spoilers (think Nascar spoiler, not a wing) have proven very effective on numerous Miata. I've personally seen the data from a few top West Coast CSP Miata with/without their 12" plexi spoilers, which they run because they are limited by the rules. Quite impressive what even these somewhat crude devices can do at 40-60mph.
I do tend to agree with you about the Illuminas comment. That made me chuckle. I'm sure there is much more work that could help improve lap times, without having to jump into the world of aero, especially for a daily-driven street car. Removing splitters and wings before/after track days gets old. That's why I essentially drive a brick.
Chris H.
-if you put a pair of canards on an Isetta, would you then go backwards?
A canard works by deflecting the air upwards. This creates tons of turbulence which means tons of drag. Along with that, the turbulence reduces the effective area of the wing because the air flowing over, under, and around the canard is not laminar.
If you look at very effecient wing designs, you'll notice they don't build much downforce at low speeds. A wing design that does generate a lot of downforce at low speeds is also going to generate a lot of drag. Thats the nature of the beast. The AM specials you see at solo events have 20sq/ft of wing area at their disposal. They've got over 200whp. They are aerodynamically limited to somewhere around 60-65mph. Their wings only generate a couple hundred pounds of downforce. A canard on the other hand might generate 2-3lbs of downforce (my bet is they'll do less then that, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here) yet still burn up 15-20hp with added drag. (again, benefit of the doubt. I wouldn't be surprised if they burned up 30hp or more at 90mph)
[/QUOTE]
Jeepers...it is posts like this that really show how much you guess at stuff sometimes. You might want to pay a little more attention to the AM cars when they run, lord knows you have plenty of them in NER. I've personally seen a few of the BC, Canada AM cars well over 100mph, without changing their wing setup from the 50-60mph practice courses the morning of. And you might want to take a few basic aero classes at your local school. 15-20whp of drag for a couple canards? HA! I think I just heard Bernuli turn over in his grave.
Davenow: Rear spoilers (think Nascar spoiler, not a wing) have proven very effective on numerous Miata. I've personally seen the data from a few top West Coast CSP Miata with/without their 12" plexi spoilers, which they run because they are limited by the rules. Quite impressive what even these somewhat crude devices can do at 40-60mph.
I do tend to agree with you about the Illuminas comment. That made me chuckle. I'm sure there is much more work that could help improve lap times, without having to jump into the world of aero, especially for a daily-driven street car. Removing splitters and wings before/after track days gets old. That's why I essentially drive a brick.
Chris H.
-if you put a pair of canards on an Isetta, would you then go backwards?
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-01-2007 12:14 PM |
[QUOTE=solo-x;17216392]Regardless, at 80mph even an F1 wing package doesn't build much downforce.[/QUOTE]
:confused:
F1 cars develop enough downforce at 100mph to drive upside down, and that's an old statistic.
- andrew
:confused:
F1 cars develop enough downforce at 100mph to drive upside down, and that's an old statistic.
- andrew
| moswald80 | 03-01-2007 12:41 PM |
[QUOTE=Don-HRD;17221078]Wing area is not as important as wing angle, wing design, and how much clean air it gets.[/QUOTE]
I agree that a well designed wing is most important but I would like to add that a wing's size still plays a big role in the total downforce generated. As you know, Downforce (or lift) is caused by the difference in pressure (pounds [U]per square inch[/U]) between the top and bottom surfaces of the wing. So for a given wing design (shape, angle of attack, etc.) and flow velocity, a wing with twice the area (square inches) will generate twice the downforce.
I agree that a well designed wing is most important but I would like to add that a wing's size still plays a big role in the total downforce generated. As you know, Downforce (or lift) is caused by the difference in pressure (pounds [U]per square inch[/U]) between the top and bottom surfaces of the wing. So for a given wing design (shape, angle of attack, etc.) and flow velocity, a wing with twice the area (square inches) will generate twice the downforce.
| MPME | 03-01-2007 12:44 PM |
Most people that mod their street car and add dive planes do it for looks. In any racing series that allows them, you'll usually find them on those cars.
Dive planes do provide a degree of localized downforce/drag, but do more to direct airflow around the car and to create a smaller wake by channeling the wake as it rounds the front fenders.
If you wanted to find an easy answer to your question, you might look at some recent ALMS, DTM, or Super GT pictures. You could decuce that if top teams with multi-million dollars budgets and big wind tunnel programs have them on their cars, they aren't there to be 'bling.'
Dive planes do provide a degree of localized downforce/drag, but do more to direct airflow around the car and to create a smaller wake by channeling the wake as it rounds the front fenders.
If you wanted to find an easy answer to your question, you might look at some recent ALMS, DTM, or Super GT pictures. You could decuce that if top teams with multi-million dollars budgets and big wind tunnel programs have them on their cars, they aren't there to be 'bling.'
| solo-x | 03-01-2007 12:59 PM |
I'm the first to admit I don't know all there is to know about aero dynamics. You won't find me saying stuff like "well the Time attack guys use them, so they must do something!" either. I'm a skeptic by default. If your best counter is "Damn, you guessed that it was 15-20whp? You suck!" then prove me wrong. I like that ****, in fact, let me help you.
So, I did some digging. An '05 Miata has a Cd of .38 top up, .44 top down. It also has a frontal area of 22.3sq-ft. All this means is that at 80mph, your typical miata burns up ~34whp with the top down, and ~29whp with the top up.
So, how much drag do you need to burn up another 15whp? If you didn't increase the frontal area ANY and still went 80mph, the Cd would have to jump to .64. That is a lot, so my first guess may very well have been off. A canard certainly won't increase the frontal area a lot, but then that's gotta start making you wonder just how much downforce it is going to generate. If it makes a lot, then it's going to make a lot of drag too. IMO, from a ROI point of view, you're better off spending your money elsewhere.
So, I did some digging. An '05 Miata has a Cd of .38 top up, .44 top down. It also has a frontal area of 22.3sq-ft. All this means is that at 80mph, your typical miata burns up ~34whp with the top down, and ~29whp with the top up.
So, how much drag do you need to burn up another 15whp? If you didn't increase the frontal area ANY and still went 80mph, the Cd would have to jump to .64. That is a lot, so my first guess may very well have been off. A canard certainly won't increase the frontal area a lot, but then that's gotta start making you wonder just how much downforce it is going to generate. If it makes a lot, then it's going to make a lot of drag too. IMO, from a ROI point of view, you're better off spending your money elsewhere.
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 01:02 PM |
[quote=moswald80;17223003]I agree that a well designed wing is most important but I would like to add that a wing's size still plays a big role in the total downforce generated. As you know, Downforce (or lift) is caused by the difference in pressure (pounds [U]per square inch[/U]) between the top and bottom surfaces of the wing. So for a given wing design (shape, angle of attack, etc.) and flow velocity, a wing with twice the area (square inches) will generate twice the downforce.[/quote]
Generically I am always bound by rules that limit wing area, so therefore design and placement are much more important.I apologize, as I automatically think in terms of limitations and take for granted that we would have optimized what fits in the box allowed. You are correct that more wing area is better, up to the point that weight and drag offset the benefits.
Generically I am always bound by rules that limit wing area, so therefore design and placement are much more important.I apologize, as I automatically think in terms of limitations and take for granted that we would have optimized what fits in the box allowed. You are correct that more wing area is better, up to the point that weight and drag offset the benefits.
| solo-x | 03-01-2007 01:05 PM |
[QUOTE=RaceComp Engineering;17222686]:confused:
F1 cars develop enough downforce at 100mph to drive upside down, and that's an old statistic.
- andrew[/QUOTE]
If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. They also won't run the wings in the max downforce configuration because the drag hit is so great the car would turn a slower lap overall. Finally, F1 rules have changed over the rears, limiting wing size.
Another big difference is that the wings found on an F1 car don't generate their downforce by just deflecting the air upwards. They also aren't placed on the car whilly nilly with an angle of attack that may already have the wing in a stall attitude, something that could be very easy to do with canards on a production car and no wind tunnel. KISS is a great approach. Splitter/air damn and a wing on the rear.
J-Rho, where you at? I'm sure you've got an opinion on this.
F1 cars develop enough downforce at 100mph to drive upside down, and that's an old statistic.
- andrew[/QUOTE]
If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. They also won't run the wings in the max downforce configuration because the drag hit is so great the car would turn a slower lap overall. Finally, F1 rules have changed over the rears, limiting wing size.
Another big difference is that the wings found on an F1 car don't generate their downforce by just deflecting the air upwards. They also aren't placed on the car whilly nilly with an angle of attack that may already have the wing in a stall attitude, something that could be very easy to do with canards on a production car and no wind tunnel. KISS is a great approach. Splitter/air damn and a wing on the rear.
J-Rho, where you at? I'm sure you've got an opinion on this.
| grippgoat | 03-01-2007 01:14 PM |
[QUOTE=solo-x;17223354]If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. [/QUOTE]
F1 cars are at least 600kg (I think 660kg with driver). That definitely qualifies as a whole lot of downforce, especially at 100mph.
-Mike
F1 cars are at least 600kg (I think 660kg with driver). That definitely qualifies as a whole lot of downforce, especially at 100mph.
-Mike
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 01:17 PM |
In most cases when on a road course horsepower means very little to lap time, but properly applied aero can mean tons. Example: I can easily add 50whp to an EVO and not see more than a couple of tenths, but when I add an adjustable rear wing element say from the EVO7, and a groundplane of some sort, I can pretty much count on a marked improvement in lap time(.5 seconds at Pueblo,CO) and the driver will be a lot happier with the car. Drag is important at a longer track like road america, but I will gladly trade downforce for drag up to a point. Having a streamlined missile capable of an extra 3mph down the straight is pretty useless if the car is unstable or has to practically stop through the corners.
From what I gather you have no first-hand knowledge of aero and its effects, so I am not sure why you made the very definitive statements you did. The original questions were: Will deviations help his high speed stability issues? The answer is not really, but they wont hurt. Will a wing help? The answer is absolutely, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing! A spoiler will help if he is rules limited to a spoiler and not a wing. I gather he is running trackdays, and so wiht no such limitation I would recommend he fit some form of wing, along with a front groundplane.
[quote=solo-x;17223261]I'm the first to admit I don't know all there is to know about aero dynamics. You won't find me saying stuff like "well the Time attack guys use them, so they must do something!" either. I'm a skeptic by default. If your best counter is "Damn, you guessed that it was 15-20whp? You suck!" then prove me wrong. I like that ****, in fact, let me help you.
So, I did some digging. An '05 Miata has a Cd of .38 top up, .44 top down. It also has a frontal area of 22.3sq-ft. All this means is that at 80mph, your typical miata burns up ~34whp with the top down, and ~29whp with the top up.
So, how much drag do you need to burn up another 15whp? If you didn't increase the frontal area ANY and still went 80mph, the Cd would have to jump to .64. That is a lot, so my first guess may very well have been off. A canard certainly won't increase the frontal area a lot, but then that's gotta start making you wonder just how much downforce it is going to generate. If it makes a lot, then it's going to make a lot of drag too. IMO, from a ROI point of view, you're better off spending your money elsewhere.[/quote]
From what I gather you have no first-hand knowledge of aero and its effects, so I am not sure why you made the very definitive statements you did. The original questions were: Will deviations help his high speed stability issues? The answer is not really, but they wont hurt. Will a wing help? The answer is absolutely, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing! A spoiler will help if he is rules limited to a spoiler and not a wing. I gather he is running trackdays, and so wiht no such limitation I would recommend he fit some form of wing, along with a front groundplane.
[quote=solo-x;17223261]I'm the first to admit I don't know all there is to know about aero dynamics. You won't find me saying stuff like "well the Time attack guys use them, so they must do something!" either. I'm a skeptic by default. If your best counter is "Damn, you guessed that it was 15-20whp? You suck!" then prove me wrong. I like that ****, in fact, let me help you.
So, I did some digging. An '05 Miata has a Cd of .38 top up, .44 top down. It also has a frontal area of 22.3sq-ft. All this means is that at 80mph, your typical miata burns up ~34whp with the top down, and ~29whp with the top up.
So, how much drag do you need to burn up another 15whp? If you didn't increase the frontal area ANY and still went 80mph, the Cd would have to jump to .64. That is a lot, so my first guess may very well have been off. A canard certainly won't increase the frontal area a lot, but then that's gotta start making you wonder just how much downforce it is going to generate. If it makes a lot, then it's going to make a lot of drag too. IMO, from a ROI point of view, you're better off spending your money elsewhere.[/quote]
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 01:22 PM |
CART cars which develop a lot less downforce than F1 generate enough downforce that they need +1000psi springs(effective rate, not actual) and enough ground effect to rip manhole cover out of the ground, which is why they are welded in place on street circuits. An F1 car is a perfect example of optimum downforce generated for least amount of drag, and they are AERO limited in an effort to keep them from going faster.
[quote=solo-x;17223354]If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. They also won't run the wings in the max downforce configuration because the drag hit is so great the car would turn a slower lap overall. Finally, F1 rules have changed over the rears, limiting wing size.
Another big difference is that the wings found on an F1 car don't generate their downforce by just deflecting the air upwards. They also aren't placed on the car whilly nilly with an angle of attack that may already have the wing in a stall attitude, something that could be very easy to do with canards on a production car and no wind tunnel. KISS is a great approach. Splitter/air damn and a wing on the rear.
J-Rho, where you at? I'm sure you've got an opinion on this.[/quote]
[quote=solo-x;17223354]If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. They also won't run the wings in the max downforce configuration because the drag hit is so great the car would turn a slower lap overall. Finally, F1 rules have changed over the rears, limiting wing size.
Another big difference is that the wings found on an F1 car don't generate their downforce by just deflecting the air upwards. They also aren't placed on the car whilly nilly with an angle of attack that may already have the wing in a stall attitude, something that could be very easy to do with canards on a production car and no wind tunnel. KISS is a great approach. Splitter/air damn and a wing on the rear.
J-Rho, where you at? I'm sure you've got an opinion on this.[/quote]
| Patrick Olsen | 03-01-2007 01:37 PM |
Don, when you say "groundplane" are you referring to a front splitter or a front undertray (or a combination of the two)? Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
Not directly related to this discussion, but here's a thread from another forum with some actual data taken to show how effective aero can be - even the primitive type of aero we're talking about here on a race-prepped street car in the 80-100mph range. [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33233"][U]Aero thread with some interesting numbers.[/U][/URL] First car is an American Iron Mustang, and then farther down in the thread is a '72 911 (which doesn't have much '72 left in it other than the VIN :) ).
Pat
Not directly related to this discussion, but here's a thread from another forum with some actual data taken to show how effective aero can be - even the primitive type of aero we're talking about here on a race-prepped street car in the 80-100mph range. [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33233"][U]Aero thread with some interesting numbers.[/U][/URL] First car is an American Iron Mustang, and then farther down in the thread is a '72 911 (which doesn't have much '72 left in it other than the VIN :) ).
Pat
| Mechie3 | 03-01-2007 01:44 PM |
[QUOTE=eclip5e;17207315]isn't that what i said?[/QUOTE]
haha...yes, with the addition of my first comment about a splitter. Besides, it's good when more than one person comes to the same idea to create consensus :)
haha...yes, with the addition of my first comment about a splitter. Besides, it's good when more than one person comes to the same idea to create consensus :)
| pio!pio! | 03-01-2007 01:56 PM |
Just by looking at your bumpers, canards may help reduce drag because it will be shielding the exposed front tire area..
exposed rolling tires generate more drag than a canard, so you could just use them to keep the air from directly hitting the rolling tire...
exposed rolling tires generate more drag than a canard, so you could just use them to keep the air from directly hitting the rolling tire...
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 02:01 PM |
Sorry, I should have clarified- when I say "groundplane" I mean a flat splitter that typically continues back level or with little deviation to at least the middle of the front axles. When I refer to an actual splitter I typically mean a splitter with deviations from level and diffusers or other aero built into it that is not more or less level, or in plane, with the ground. Sorry for the confusion.
Also, while I am thinking about it, splitters and groundplanes need to be able to support a lot of stress placed on them, the carbon groundplanes I make are perfectly flat and you can stand on them mounted on the car.
Cheers,
Don
[quote=Patrick Olsen;17223765]Don, when you say "groundplane" are you referring to a front splitter or a front undertray (or a combination of the two)? Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
Not directly related to this discussion, but here's a thread from another forum with some actual data taken to show how effective aero can be - even the primitive type of aero we're talking about here on a race-prepped street car in the 80-100mph range. [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33233"][U]Aero thread with some interesting numbers.[/U][/URL] First car is an American Iron Mustang, and then farther down in the thread is a '72 911 (which doesn't have much '72 left in it other than the VIN :) ).
Pat[/quote]
Also, while I am thinking about it, splitters and groundplanes need to be able to support a lot of stress placed on them, the carbon groundplanes I make are perfectly flat and you can stand on them mounted on the car.
Cheers,
Don
[quote=Patrick Olsen;17223765]Don, when you say "groundplane" are you referring to a front splitter or a front undertray (or a combination of the two)? Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
Not directly related to this discussion, but here's a thread from another forum with some actual data taken to show how effective aero can be - even the primitive type of aero we're talking about here on a race-prepped street car in the 80-100mph range. [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33233"][U]Aero thread with some interesting numbers.[/U][/URL] First car is an American Iron Mustang, and then farther down in the thread is a '72 911 (which doesn't have much '72 left in it other than the VIN :) ).
Pat[/quote]
| Don-HRD | 03-01-2007 02:02 PM |
[quote=pio!pio!;17224026]Just by looking at your bumpers, canards may help reduce drag because it will be shielding the exposed front tire area..
exposed rolling tires generate more drag than a canard, so you could just use them to keep the air from directly hitting the rolling tire...[/quote]
Canards could be used for that, but the better device there are wind fences, which can be as simple as plexiglass bits bolted to the inner wheelwell.
exposed rolling tires generate more drag than a canard, so you could just use them to keep the air from directly hitting the rolling tire...[/quote]
Canards could be used for that, but the better device there are wind fences, which can be as simple as plexiglass bits bolted to the inner wheelwell.
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-01-2007 02:11 PM |
[QUOTE=Don-HRD;17224094]Canards could be used for that, but the better device there are wind fences, which can be as simple as plexiglass bits bolted to the inner wheelwell.[/QUOTE]
Like on the new Z06. Can't find a picture though....
- Andrew
Like on the new Z06. Can't find a picture though....
- Andrew
| Chiketkd | 03-01-2007 02:30 PM |
[QUOTE=RaceComp Engineering;17224220]Like on the new Z06. Can't find a picture though....
- Andrew[/QUOTE]
These were the only pics I can find which were taken by Team WTF?! when I rode shotgun with Rod McGeorge in his ASP C6 Z06:
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ062.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ063.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ064.jpg[/IMG]
-Chike
- Andrew[/QUOTE]
These were the only pics I can find which were taken by Team WTF?! when I rode shotgun with Rod McGeorge in his ASP C6 Z06:
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ062.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ063.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d14/Chiketkd/2006%20Subaru%20WRX%20TR/AutoX%20pics/WDCR%209-3-06/RodMcGeorgeASPZ064.jpg[/IMG]
-Chike
| Patrick Olsen | 03-01-2007 04:40 PM |
Ummmm... yeah, those aren't helping much, Chike! ;)
Here, try this one - [url]http://www.grandsportregistry.com/photopost//showphoto.php?photo=1066&cat=all&si=Z06[/url].
I plan to do something similar in the not-too-distant future, as I'll be installing some '04+ forged control arms, which will push my tires out a bit. I don't know if they'll actually clear the bumper, but it'll be close. We'll see...
Pat
Here, try this one - [url]http://www.grandsportregistry.com/photopost//showphoto.php?photo=1066&cat=all&si=Z06[/url].
I plan to do something similar in the not-too-distant future, as I'll be installing some '04+ forged control arms, which will push my tires out a bit. I don't know if they'll actually clear the bumper, but it'll be close. We'll see...
Pat
| Chiketkd | 03-01-2007 04:57 PM |
[QUOTE=Patrick Olsen;17226146]Here, try this one - [url]http://www.grandsportregistry.com/photopost//showphoto.php?photo=1066&cat=all&si=Z06[/url].[/QUOTE]
Much better pic Pat!
Much better pic Pat!
| Davenow | 03-02-2007 02:09 PM |
Ok since I have to clarify this, which I am really suprised this needs explaining...
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:
| Davenow | 03-02-2007 02:11 PM |
Ok so front splitter, the only front splitter out there that works with the MSM nose/lip is this one
[img]http://www.trackdogracing.com/website/product_photos/msm_splitter_l.jpg[/img]
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?
And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?
And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?
Oh and someone said "run the front groundplane as far back as possible"
I have litterally zero idea what that means... :(
[img]http://www.trackdogracing.com/website/product_photos/msm_splitter_l.jpg[/img]
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?
And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?
And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?
Oh and someone said "run the front groundplane as far back as possible"
I have litterally zero idea what that means... :(
| JMS Landshark | 03-02-2007 02:50 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17236553]Ok so front splitter, the only front splitter out there that works with the MSM nose/lip is this one
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?
And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?
And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?
Oh and someone said "run the front groundplane as far back as possible"
I have litterally zero idea what that means... :([/QUOTE]
I dont' think that lip extends enough to have much effect, maybe a little.
If there isn't a solution on the market, then develop it. :)
Get some ABS (I have bought some from interstate plastics) and get to work. I would say target about a 4" lip in front of the bumper. Its hard to know without going out and getting some real life data. Depending on how effective it is, you may need reinforcements.
Running the ground plane back is essentially contuiing the splitter under the car back to your steering rack. Make a nice flat surface from 4" forward of the bump all the way to the front axles.
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?
And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?
And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?
Oh and someone said "run the front groundplane as far back as possible"
I have litterally zero idea what that means... :([/QUOTE]
I dont' think that lip extends enough to have much effect, maybe a little.
If there isn't a solution on the market, then develop it. :)
Get some ABS (I have bought some from interstate plastics) and get to work. I would say target about a 4" lip in front of the bumper. Its hard to know without going out and getting some real life data. Depending on how effective it is, you may need reinforcements.
Running the ground plane back is essentially contuiing the splitter under the car back to your steering rack. Make a nice flat surface from 4" forward of the bump all the way to the front axles.
| Davenow | 03-02-2007 03:10 PM |
Ok that makes sense. So basically I could just copy that design and extend it out another couple inches and it would be effective (or more effective?)
Also, there is an undercover similar to the plastic tray under the motors on the subies, would that be enough of that you are talking about, or should it be a dead flat surface like a splitter?
Know of any sources for a 5ftx4 foot 3/8 inch ABS sheet? (or do you think I would need 1/2"?)
Also, there is an undercover similar to the plastic tray under the motors on the subies, would that be enough of that you are talking about, or should it be a dead flat surface like a splitter?
Know of any sources for a 5ftx4 foot 3/8 inch ABS sheet? (or do you think I would need 1/2"?)
| moswald80 | 03-02-2007 04:44 PM |
[QUOTE=Don-HRD;17224076]... the carbon groundplanes I make are perfectly flat and you can stand on them mounted on the car.[/QUOTE]
Do you make these groundplanes for Subarus?
Do you make these groundplanes for Subarus?
| Patrick Olsen | 03-02-2007 04:46 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17236512]Ok since I have to clarify this, which I am really suprised this needs explaining...
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:[/QUOTE]
I knew what you meant, Dave, but of course it's a lot more fun if one assumes that the person you're replying to is an idiot and treat them as such. :rolleyes: (And the rolleyes guy is not intended to imply that I haven't been guilty of doing that myself. :) )
[QUOTE=Davenow;17236553]Ok so front splitter, the only front splitter out there that works with the MSM nose/lip is this one...
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?[/quote]
It'll do some good, but as JMS said you really want it to extend out a bit more, and if you can mount it down low (with some sort of bumper extension to fill the gap) it would be even better. A 3" splitter would probably be enough. Keep in mind, the bigger and more effective it gets, the more important it is to have it supported in some way - see the Mustang and Porsche pictures in the corner-carvers.com link I inserted earlier.
[quote=Davenow]And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?[quote]
There are plenty of wing options out there for less than 1/4 that much. For the kind of money we amateur tinkerers are looking to spend, we're not going to get a beautiful, composite design like the Aston Martin DBR9 runs. :) Someone who is really motivated can spend hours analyzing air foil parameters - [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30257&page=2"][U]scroll down through this thread[/U][/URL] and start reading to see how complex this can get. Or, you can just [URL="http://www.aprperformance.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=45"][U]use a generic wing[/U][/URL], like most amateur open trackers do. It'll still do the trick.
[quote=Davenow]And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?[/quote]
Again, refer to the corner-carvers link I posted before. Without a wind tunnel your best bet is to get creative with data analysis. You can do things like checking lap time splits (am I going through this series of corners quicker than I did without the aero?); checking your speed at the top end of straightaways (is the aero creating so much drag that I'm slower on the straights?); finding a straight, flat stretch of road and having someone drive alongside you and take pics (or video) of your car in profile so you can analyze ride height, etc.
[QUOTE=JMS Landshark;17237066]I dont' think that lip extends enough to have much effect, maybe a little.
If there isn't a solution on the market, then develop it. :) [/quote]
Amen!
[QUOTE=JMS Landshark]Get some ABS (I have bought some from interstate plastics) and get to work.[/QUOTE]
What thickness of ABS did you use? Do you have any pictures of what you've developed?
[QUOTE=Davenow;17237340]Also, there is an undercover similar to the plastic tray under the motors on the subies, would that be enough of that you are talking about, or should it be a dead flat surface like a splitter?[/quote]
I haven't had my car on a track yet, but adding an undertray to my car has had a noticeable impact on coolant temperature (dropped about 3-4degC at highway speeds), which I assume it due to more efficient airflow through the front of the car. The undertray I have isn't perfectly flat, but it clearly has made a difference.
[quote=Davenow]Know of any sources for a 5ftx4 foot 3/8 inch ABS sheet? (or do you think I would need 1/2"?)[/QUOTE]
You shouldn't need anything that thick, just like you didn't need to hit "Return" 11 times between those two paragraphs! :p
Pat
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:[/QUOTE]
I knew what you meant, Dave, but of course it's a lot more fun if one assumes that the person you're replying to is an idiot and treat them as such. :rolleyes: (And the rolleyes guy is not intended to imply that I haven't been guilty of doing that myself. :) )
[QUOTE=Davenow;17236553]Ok so front splitter, the only front splitter out there that works with the MSM nose/lip is this one...
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?[/quote]
It'll do some good, but as JMS said you really want it to extend out a bit more, and if you can mount it down low (with some sort of bumper extension to fill the gap) it would be even better. A 3" splitter would probably be enough. Keep in mind, the bigger and more effective it gets, the more important it is to have it supported in some way - see the Mustang and Porsche pictures in the corner-carvers.com link I inserted earlier.
[quote=Davenow]And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?[quote]
There are plenty of wing options out there for less than 1/4 that much. For the kind of money we amateur tinkerers are looking to spend, we're not going to get a beautiful, composite design like the Aston Martin DBR9 runs. :) Someone who is really motivated can spend hours analyzing air foil parameters - [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30257&page=2"][U]scroll down through this thread[/U][/URL] and start reading to see how complex this can get. Or, you can just [URL="http://www.aprperformance.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=45"][U]use a generic wing[/U][/URL], like most amateur open trackers do. It'll still do the trick.
[quote=Davenow]And without a wind tunnel, is it really possible to set the wing up properly, without just creating more drag and no downforce?[/quote]
Again, refer to the corner-carvers link I posted before. Without a wind tunnel your best bet is to get creative with data analysis. You can do things like checking lap time splits (am I going through this series of corners quicker than I did without the aero?); checking your speed at the top end of straightaways (is the aero creating so much drag that I'm slower on the straights?); finding a straight, flat stretch of road and having someone drive alongside you and take pics (or video) of your car in profile so you can analyze ride height, etc.
[QUOTE=JMS Landshark;17237066]I dont' think that lip extends enough to have much effect, maybe a little.
If there isn't a solution on the market, then develop it. :) [/quote]
Amen!
[QUOTE=JMS Landshark]Get some ABS (I have bought some from interstate plastics) and get to work.[/QUOTE]
What thickness of ABS did you use? Do you have any pictures of what you've developed?
[QUOTE=Davenow;17237340]Also, there is an undercover similar to the plastic tray under the motors on the subies, would that be enough of that you are talking about, or should it be a dead flat surface like a splitter?[/quote]
I haven't had my car on a track yet, but adding an undertray to my car has had a noticeable impact on coolant temperature (dropped about 3-4degC at highway speeds), which I assume it due to more efficient airflow through the front of the car. The undertray I have isn't perfectly flat, but it clearly has made a difference.
[quote=Davenow]Know of any sources for a 5ftx4 foot 3/8 inch ABS sheet? (or do you think I would need 1/2"?)[/QUOTE]
You shouldn't need anything that thick, just like you didn't need to hit "Return" 11 times between those two paragraphs! :p
Pat
| elgorey | 03-02-2007 04:58 PM |
worthless bling. You will slower by 5mph at the end of the straights, and have no perceptible increase in grip. (I have been at the track when people were testing them and saw the results)
unless you plan on renting a week or two of windtunnel time.
if you feel you are unstable in high speed corners, look to your setup. alignment first, then shocks, then bars and spring rates.
most likely, your car being 'unstable', is actuality a good thing. Loose is fast!
unless you plan on renting a week or two of windtunnel time.
if you feel you are unstable in high speed corners, look to your setup. alignment first, then shocks, then bars and spring rates.
most likely, your car being 'unstable', is actuality a good thing. Loose is fast!
| STi-MAN | 03-02-2007 05:05 PM |
[QUOTE=Don-HRD;17223516]In most cases when on a road course horsepower means very little to lap time, but properly applied aero can mean tons. Example: I can easily add 50whp to an EVO and not see more than a couple of tenths, but when I add an adjustable rear wing element say from the EVO7, and a groundplane of some sort, I can pretty much count on a marked improvement in lap time(.5 seconds at Pueblo,CO) and the driver will be a lot happier with the car. Drag is important at a longer track like road america, but I will gladly trade downforce for drag up to a point. Having a streamlined missile capable of an extra 3mph down the straight is pretty useless if the car is unstable or has to practically stop through the corners.
From what I gather you have no first-hand knowledge of aero and its effects, so I am not sure why you made the very definitive statements you did. The original questions were: Will deviations help his high speed stability issues? The answer is not really, but they wont hurt. Will a wing help? The answer is absolutely, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing! A spoiler will help if he is rules limited to a spoiler and not a wing. I gather he is running trackdays, and so wiht no such limitation I would recommend he fit some form of wing, along with a front groundplane.[/QUOTE]
+thats what im talking about. And I much rather believe "time attack" cars then some guy on the internet saying canards are useless.
From what I gather you have no first-hand knowledge of aero and its effects, so I am not sure why you made the very definitive statements you did. The original questions were: Will deviations help his high speed stability issues? The answer is not really, but they wont hurt. Will a wing help? The answer is absolutely, you aint got a thing if you aint got the wing! A spoiler will help if he is rules limited to a spoiler and not a wing. I gather he is running trackdays, and so wiht no such limitation I would recommend he fit some form of wing, along with a front groundplane.[/QUOTE]
+thats what im talking about. And I much rather believe "time attack" cars then some guy on the internet saying canards are useless.
| elgorey | 03-02-2007 05:11 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17236512]Ok since I have to clarify this, which I am really suprised this needs explaining...
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:[/QUOTE]
I read this after I posted and now Im sorry I wasted time on you.
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.
And instead of jumping to what [i]you think[/i] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.
What I said was, with MY CURRENT SUSPENSION SETUP, there is nothing more I can do to tweak the suspension. Now if anyone can please explain to me how going to better suspension, would fit into the description of making MY CURRENT SUSPENSION more "well setup" that would be great :lol:
And you guys act like I dont know there are better suspensions out there. :huh:[/QUOTE]
I read this after I posted and now Im sorry I wasted time on you.
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.
And instead of jumping to what [i]you think[/i] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.
| Don-HRD | 03-02-2007 05:20 PM |
They will be once we have the Pro cars going:) if there is enough interest I will consider selling them to the general public
[quote=moswald80;17238594]Do you make these groundplanes for Subarus?[/quote]
[quote=moswald80;17238594]Do you make these groundplanes for Subarus?[/quote]
| Don-HRD | 03-02-2007 05:28 PM |
Honsetly you need a groundplane that is a lot stronger than most ABS, assuming that it does indeed work. The Carbon groundplanes I make are about 1/2" thick, light enough to be tossed like a frisbee, and strong enough a 180lb guy can stand on them when mounted to the car.
[quote=Patrick Olsen;17238622]I knew what you meant, Dave, but of course it's a lot more fun if one assumes that the person you're replying to is an idiot and treat them as such. :rolleyes: (And the rolleyes guy is not intended to imply that I haven't been guilty of doing that myself. :) )
It'll do some good, but as JMS said you really want it to extend out a bit more, and if you can mount it down low (with some sort of bumper extension to fill the gap) it would be even better. A 3" splitter would probably be enough. Keep in mind, the bigger and more effective it gets, the more important it is to have it supported in some way - see the Mustang and Porsche pictures in the corner-carvers.com link I inserted earlier.
[quote=Davenow]And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?[quote]
There are plenty of wing options out there for less than 1/4 that much. For the kind of money we amateur tinkerers are looking to spend, we're not going to get a beautiful, composite design like the Aston Martin DBR9 runs. :) Someone who is really motivated can spend hours analyzing air foil parameters - [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30257&page=2"][U]scroll down through this thread[/U][/URL] and start reading to see how complex this can get. Or, you can just [URL="http://www.aprperformance.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=45"][U]use a generic wing[/U][/URL], like most amateur open trackers do. It'll still do the trick.
Again, refer to the corner-carvers link I posted before. Without a wind tunnel your best bet is to get creative with data analysis. You can do things like checking lap time splits (am I going through this series of corners quicker than I did without the aero?); checking your speed at the top end of straightaways (is the aero creating so much drag that I'm slower on the straights?); finding a straight, flat stretch of road and having someone drive alongside you and take pics (or video) of your car in profile so you can analyze ride height, etc.
Amen!
What thickness of ABS did you use? Do you have any pictures of what you've developed?
I haven't had my car on a track yet, but adding an undertray to my car has had a noticeable impact on coolant temperature (dropped about 3-4degC at highway speeds), which I assume it due to more efficient airflow through the front of the car. The undertray I have isn't perfectly flat, but it clearly has made a difference.
You shouldn't need anything that thick, just like you didn't need to hit "Return" 11 times between those two paragraphs! :p
Pat[/quote]
[quote=Patrick Olsen;17238622]I knew what you meant, Dave, but of course it's a lot more fun if one assumes that the person you're replying to is an idiot and treat them as such. :rolleyes: (And the rolleyes guy is not intended to imply that I haven't been guilty of doing that myself. :) )
It'll do some good, but as JMS said you really want it to extend out a bit more, and if you can mount it down low (with some sort of bumper extension to fill the gap) it would be even better. A 3" splitter would probably be enough. Keep in mind, the bigger and more effective it gets, the more important it is to have it supported in some way - see the Mustang and Porsche pictures in the corner-carvers.com link I inserted earlier.
[quote=Davenow]And does anyone have any ideas on where to get a wing that will be more effective and less ricer that wont be 1500 bucks?[quote]
There are plenty of wing options out there for less than 1/4 that much. For the kind of money we amateur tinkerers are looking to spend, we're not going to get a beautiful, composite design like the Aston Martin DBR9 runs. :) Someone who is really motivated can spend hours analyzing air foil parameters - [URL="http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30257&page=2"][U]scroll down through this thread[/U][/URL] and start reading to see how complex this can get. Or, you can just [URL="http://www.aprperformance.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=45"][U]use a generic wing[/U][/URL], like most amateur open trackers do. It'll still do the trick.
Again, refer to the corner-carvers link I posted before. Without a wind tunnel your best bet is to get creative with data analysis. You can do things like checking lap time splits (am I going through this series of corners quicker than I did without the aero?); checking your speed at the top end of straightaways (is the aero creating so much drag that I'm slower on the straights?); finding a straight, flat stretch of road and having someone drive alongside you and take pics (or video) of your car in profile so you can analyze ride height, etc.
Amen!
What thickness of ABS did you use? Do you have any pictures of what you've developed?
I haven't had my car on a track yet, but adding an undertray to my car has had a noticeable impact on coolant temperature (dropped about 3-4degC at highway speeds), which I assume it due to more efficient airflow through the front of the car. The undertray I have isn't perfectly flat, but it clearly has made a difference.
You shouldn't need anything that thick, just like you didn't need to hit "Return" 11 times between those two paragraphs! :p
Pat[/quote]
| goto_racing | 03-02-2007 06:59 PM |
[QUOTE=Don-HRD;17239175]Honsetly you need a groundplane that is a lot stronger than most ABS, assuming that it does indeed work. The Carbon groundplanes I make are about 1/2" thick, light enough to be tossed like a frisbee, and strong enough a 180lb guy can stand on them when mounted to the car.
[/QUOTE]
For those looking for a more economical version than carbon, I suggest trying HDPE. Pick it up at your local plastics shop. Strong abrasion resistence.
Chris Lock
[/QUOTE]
For those looking for a more economical version than carbon, I suggest trying HDPE. Pick it up at your local plastics shop. Strong abrasion resistence.
Chris Lock
| Patrick Olsen | 03-03-2007 12:34 AM |
[QUOTE=elgorey;17238967]I read this after I posted and now Im sorry I wasted time on you.
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.[/quote]
He specifically said that he has tweaked the current suspension to get the most out of it. If you know some tricks of the trade that he might not then feel free to volunteer that information. However, to assume that he just bolted on a bunch of parts and expected the car to magically perform to its maximum potential is silly.
[quote=elgorey]And instead of jumping to what [i]you think[/i] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.[/QUOTE]
Instead of jumping to the conclustion that [i]you think[/i] Dave doesn't know what he's talking about, how about you just answer the questions he's asking? Why does he need to prove that he's allowed to ask the question? :rolleyes:
Pat
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.[/quote]
He specifically said that he has tweaked the current suspension to get the most out of it. If you know some tricks of the trade that he might not then feel free to volunteer that information. However, to assume that he just bolted on a bunch of parts and expected the car to magically perform to its maximum potential is silly.
[quote=elgorey]And instead of jumping to what [i]you think[/i] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.[/QUOTE]
Instead of jumping to the conclustion that [i]you think[/i] Dave doesn't know what he's talking about, how about you just answer the questions he's asking? Why does he need to prove that he's allowed to ask the question? :rolleyes:
Pat
| JMS Landshark | 03-03-2007 03:49 AM |
[QUOTE=Patrick Olsen;17238622]What thickness of ABS did you use? Do you have any pictures of what you've developed?
Pat[/QUOTE]
I haven't made one that extends out in front of the car as a splitter. I plan on doing that for a SM2 car (M Roadster) sometime this year. It will likely be to the extent of the SM2 rules and need some adjustable links for reinforcement.
Stage 1 was getting rid of the factory pieces on my weekend car (another M Roadster) and making a decent ground plane that has a ridge of padding on it to seal off the air flow and send it through the radiator and oil cooler rather than the facory pieces that let air flow right around it. I wouldn't say its the geatest thing since sliced bread, but it works. Its a pretty simple piece, but thats how I like to make things. I dont anticipate the part seeing any high loads other than some mild vibration and maybe some impacts from road debris. For a simple ground plane I used 1/8" ABS. I have run it for a few months now and have had no issues. I got it from interstate. [url]http://www.interstateplastics.com/detail.aspx?ID=ABSsheetGP-SB1012[/url]
Pat[/QUOTE]
I haven't made one that extends out in front of the car as a splitter. I plan on doing that for a SM2 car (M Roadster) sometime this year. It will likely be to the extent of the SM2 rules and need some adjustable links for reinforcement.
Stage 1 was getting rid of the factory pieces on my weekend car (another M Roadster) and making a decent ground plane that has a ridge of padding on it to seal off the air flow and send it through the radiator and oil cooler rather than the facory pieces that let air flow right around it. I wouldn't say its the geatest thing since sliced bread, but it works. Its a pretty simple piece, but thats how I like to make things. I dont anticipate the part seeing any high loads other than some mild vibration and maybe some impacts from road debris. For a simple ground plane I used 1/8" ABS. I have run it for a few months now and have had no issues. I got it from interstate. [url]http://www.interstateplastics.com/detail.aspx?ID=ABSsheetGP-SB1012[/url]
| Patrick Olsen | 03-03-2007 10:47 AM |
Thanks for the info, JMS.
| Phil Jr. | 03-03-2007 12:15 PM |
[quote=solo-x;17223354]If the wings are configured that way. Keep in mind that they don't need a whole lot of downforce to match their vehicle weight. They also won't run the wings in the max downforce configuration because the drag hit is so great the car would turn a slower lap overall. Finally, F1 rules have changed over the rears, limiting wing size.[/quote]
at monaco those wings are maxed out, so saying they never run their wings at max downforce is false. Also, just because wing size has been limited in F1 doesnt mean downforce has decreased, modern F1 cars produce FAR more downforce than even the ground effect era cars at all speeds.
at monaco those wings are maxed out, so saying they never run their wings at max downforce is false. Also, just because wing size has been limited in F1 doesnt mean downforce has decreased, modern F1 cars produce FAR more downforce than even the ground effect era cars at all speeds.
| Phil Jr. | 03-03-2007 12:24 PM |
[quote=Davenow;17236553]Ok so front splitter, the only front splitter out there that works with the MSM nose/lip is this one
[IMG]http://www.trackdogracing.com/website/product_photos/msm_splitter_l.jpg[/IMG]
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?[/quote]
not sure if I am reading you correctly but a proper front pslitter should NOT be angled downward. They produce downforce by taking advantage of the high pressure area in the front vehicles created by a blunt front bumper....such as the impreza bumper. That is why the v-limited is effective. The miata bumper is not inclredibley sleek either so a small frotn splitter should have some effect I would think. Their second major advanatge is 0 additional drag (if designed properly) by not increasing frontal arear.
And last, Davenow could you post up a pic of these "canards" you are talking about. Are they different than dive plates, the little wings seen on front of the audi R8 and other closed wheel racers.
If you wanted you could always make the bottom of you car completely flat and make sure the front end is lower than the rear, that would create a little downforce. Prolly a bit expensive though :lol:
edit: Davenow could you maybe snap a few pics of that rear aero piece on your car?
[IMG]http://www.trackdogracing.com/website/product_photos/msm_splitter_l.jpg[/IMG]
Without extending downward, is it really going to do any good?[/quote]
not sure if I am reading you correctly but a proper front pslitter should NOT be angled downward. They produce downforce by taking advantage of the high pressure area in the front vehicles created by a blunt front bumper....such as the impreza bumper. That is why the v-limited is effective. The miata bumper is not inclredibley sleek either so a small frotn splitter should have some effect I would think. Their second major advanatge is 0 additional drag (if designed properly) by not increasing frontal arear.
And last, Davenow could you post up a pic of these "canards" you are talking about. Are they different than dive plates, the little wings seen on front of the audi R8 and other closed wheel racers.
If you wanted you could always make the bottom of you car completely flat and make sure the front end is lower than the rear, that would create a little downforce. Prolly a bit expensive though :lol:
edit: Davenow could you maybe snap a few pics of that rear aero piece on your car?
| erich_sc | 03-03-2007 01:59 PM |
[QUOTE=grippgoat;17223458]F1 cars are at least 600kg (I think 660kg with driver). That definitely qualifies as a whole lot of downforce, especially at 100mph.
-Mike[/QUOTE]
I've heard they can generate around 600 kilos down force as low as 70 mph now. Unreal...
-Mike[/QUOTE]
I've heard they can generate around 600 kilos down force as low as 70 mph now. Unreal...
| Patrick Olsen | 03-03-2007 02:08 PM |
[QUOTE=Phil Jr.;17244695]not sure if I am reading you correctly but a proper front splitter should NOT be angled downward.[/QUOTE]
I think Dave was just referring to the fact that the splitter isn't any closer to the ground.
I think Dave was just referring to the fact that the splitter isn't any closer to the ground.
| Phil Jr. | 03-03-2007 02:22 PM |
oh, well its looks closer to the ground to me :confused:
and the more I look at the miata speed front bumper those areas below the fogloghts should act like a splitter no?
and the more I look at the miata speed front bumper those areas below the fogloghts should act like a splitter no?
| Pavlo | 03-03-2007 05:43 PM |
I don't have the time to look at every single line of every single post to determine if people actually know what's going on here. Basically a canard or "dive plane" is not a wing, it is a vortex generator. It works by starting a spiral vortex that runs down the side of the car and helps promote an exchange of air between the top of the car and the underside. It increases downforce by reducing the lift that is created by the overall shape of the car.
Canards were first popularised by a japanese aerodynamicist whose name escapes me, while developing a Le Mans car for another team whose name also escapes me. He found that the increase in downforce came with almost no penalty in drag, and that downforce was greater than created by a flat angles plate alng (which is what a canard basically is).
Canards were first popularised by a japanese aerodynamicist whose name escapes me, while developing a Le Mans car for another team whose name also escapes me. He found that the increase in downforce came with almost no penalty in drag, and that downforce was greater than created by a flat angles plate alng (which is what a canard basically is).
| Davenow | 03-03-2007 05:49 PM |
[quote=elgorey;17238967]I read this after I posted and now Im sorry I wasted time on you.
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.
And instead of jumping to what [I]you think[/I] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.[/quote]
The car was corner weighted and aligned by a national level autocross guy. I totally understand what you are saying, but I dont see what else, short of physical changes, can be done to this suspension setup.
And honestly, on a side note, you are really underestimating what I DO know about cars in general. I came to the motorsports forum because this is an area that I have fairly limited knowledge in. I know that on my STI, which was floaty and slightly unstable from 85 till about 125, the simple addition of the V-Limited lip (real thing, not a replica), completely 100% eliminated the problem.
So really, I DID come here to let the people who have been there/done that prescribe the solution, and although most of the replies have been very helpful (including yours that you refered to), replies like this seem to be very patronizing and talking down to me. I have 17 years wrenching experience, 8 of which were as a dealership tech, and I have been wrenching in the enthusiast side of subaru for 5+ years. (I am not saying this to imply I know it all, far from it. I wouldnt have posted the question if I felt that way) So I dont need to be laughed at when someone reads more into something I said. Its like telling someone you are eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich, then having them laugh at you because its a peanut butter and jam sandwhich on wheat toast. :lol: Its like "yeah no crap it is. Its also a friggin peanut butter and jelly" So if I seemed to be a bit "off" attitude wise, its because I kinda felt like some of the replies were talking down to me. yes, I dont know a lot about this particular area, but I am not an idiot in general (well, automotive wise anyway. Im pretty much an idiot with life in general :lol: )
Ok the symptoms.
Past about 80mph, it feels a bit twitchy. It also doesnt feel as locked down in sweepers past about 95mph.
I suspect that the alignment being more geared towards autocross is a large part of it, but I was also thinking that if I could reduce lift a bit, it would be a bit more "solid" feeling.
My car is also lower than it should be for ideal handling. Im not on the bump stops, and I know what it feels like when I hit them, and I am not hitting them when I have this feeling. Although my car is that low, my control arms are fairly parallel to the ground, which I am told is about ideal. My rears are dead on level, my fronts are slightly past that.
I dont have pics of the canards on a car, as I havent seen a miata with them. APR sells 3 "generic" fit models, you print out the template, figure out which one fits, and order it.
If you really think bolting a bunch of parts on a car is 'nothing more i can do' than you have much to learn, young one.
And instead of jumping to what [I]you think[/I] is the solution to your problem ('unstable in high speed corners') how about next time you describe the symptoms, and let the people who have been there and done that prescribe the solution.[/quote]
The car was corner weighted and aligned by a national level autocross guy. I totally understand what you are saying, but I dont see what else, short of physical changes, can be done to this suspension setup.
And honestly, on a side note, you are really underestimating what I DO know about cars in general. I came to the motorsports forum because this is an area that I have fairly limited knowledge in. I know that on my STI, which was floaty and slightly unstable from 85 till about 125, the simple addition of the V-Limited lip (real thing, not a replica), completely 100% eliminated the problem.
So really, I DID come here to let the people who have been there/done that prescribe the solution, and although most of the replies have been very helpful (including yours that you refered to), replies like this seem to be very patronizing and talking down to me. I have 17 years wrenching experience, 8 of which were as a dealership tech, and I have been wrenching in the enthusiast side of subaru for 5+ years. (I am not saying this to imply I know it all, far from it. I wouldnt have posted the question if I felt that way) So I dont need to be laughed at when someone reads more into something I said. Its like telling someone you are eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich, then having them laugh at you because its a peanut butter and jam sandwhich on wheat toast. :lol: Its like "yeah no crap it is. Its also a friggin peanut butter and jelly" So if I seemed to be a bit "off" attitude wise, its because I kinda felt like some of the replies were talking down to me. yes, I dont know a lot about this particular area, but I am not an idiot in general (well, automotive wise anyway. Im pretty much an idiot with life in general :lol: )
Ok the symptoms.
Past about 80mph, it feels a bit twitchy. It also doesnt feel as locked down in sweepers past about 95mph.
I suspect that the alignment being more geared towards autocross is a large part of it, but I was also thinking that if I could reduce lift a bit, it would be a bit more "solid" feeling.
My car is also lower than it should be for ideal handling. Im not on the bump stops, and I know what it feels like when I hit them, and I am not hitting them when I have this feeling. Although my car is that low, my control arms are fairly parallel to the ground, which I am told is about ideal. My rears are dead on level, my fronts are slightly past that.
I dont have pics of the canards on a car, as I havent seen a miata with them. APR sells 3 "generic" fit models, you print out the template, figure out which one fits, and order it.
| Davenow | 03-03-2007 05:52 PM |
[quote=Patrick Olsen;17245394]I think Dave was just referring to the fact that the splitter isn't any closer to the ground.[/quote]
Yes thats what I meant. I thought that the point of a splitter was to help force the air more cleanly up over.
Well, hell after typing that out, does it really matter if its closer to the ground? Its still going to provide a clean "divide" in the airflow right?
Yes thats what I meant. I thought that the point of a splitter was to help force the air more cleanly up over.
Well, hell after typing that out, does it really matter if its closer to the ground? Its still going to provide a clean "divide" in the airflow right?
| Davenow | 03-03-2007 06:02 PM |
[quote=erich_sc;17245337]I've heard they can generate around 600 kilos down force as low as 70 mph now. Unreal...[/quote]
I heard that they could drive on an upside down road surface past like 120mph or something like that.
I heard that they could drive on an upside down road surface past like 120mph or something like that.
| Patrick Olsen | 03-03-2007 07:14 PM |
[QUOTE=Phil Jr.;17245465]oh, well its looks closer to the ground to me :confused:[/QUOTE]
You're right, it is closer to the ground by an amount equal to its own thickness. Until someone invents a splitter that has [i]no[/i] thickness I think we can safely say that a splitter will always be closer to the ground than the bumper it is mounted to. Mounting a splitter directly to the bottom of the bumper is nice and all, but mounting a splitter like this:
[img]http://www.flyinmiata.com/projects/OTC/post/DSCN7934.jpg[/img]
is more effective. [i]That[/i] is closer to the ground.
[QUOTE=Davenow;17246785]Yes thats what I meant. I thought that the point of a splitter was to help force the air more cleanly up over.
Well, hell after typing that out, does it really matter if its closer to the ground? Its still going to provide a clean "divide" in the airflow right?[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the lower to the ground you get it, the more air you force over the top of the car and the better off you are. That's why basically every sedan-based racing series in the world, from NASCAR to BTCC to Aussie V8s, uses pavement-scraping front air dams.
Pat
You're right, it is closer to the ground by an amount equal to its own thickness. Until someone invents a splitter that has [i]no[/i] thickness I think we can safely say that a splitter will always be closer to the ground than the bumper it is mounted to. Mounting a splitter directly to the bottom of the bumper is nice and all, but mounting a splitter like this:
[img]http://www.flyinmiata.com/projects/OTC/post/DSCN7934.jpg[/img]
is more effective. [i]That[/i] is closer to the ground.
[QUOTE=Davenow;17246785]Yes thats what I meant. I thought that the point of a splitter was to help force the air more cleanly up over.
Well, hell after typing that out, does it really matter if its closer to the ground? Its still going to provide a clean "divide" in the airflow right?[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the lower to the ground you get it, the more air you force over the top of the car and the better off you are. That's why basically every sedan-based racing series in the world, from NASCAR to BTCC to Aussie V8s, uses pavement-scraping front air dams.
Pat
| KC | 03-03-2007 07:25 PM |
[QUOTE=Davenow;17246769]The car was corner weighted and aligned by a national level autocross guy. I totally understand what you are saying, but I dont see what else, short of physical changes, can be done to this suspension setup[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]I suspect that the alignment being more geared towards autocross is a large part of it, [/QUOTE]YA THINK!?!?!?! :lol:
So you're saying your off-the-shelf auto-x suspension is going to feel 'better' at 85/95 mph with an auto-x alignment if you throw aero at it?? Alignments for track/highspeed and low speed auto-x are hardly ever complimentary.
I say, set your alignment better for high speed.
Then, after you fix your alignment for better settings, think about getting properly tuned shocks and springs, set for road racing. Many times, the valving is also different as are the spring rates between the two disciplines. There is a huge difference between off-the-shelf shock, and those made FOR the discipline you're attempting.
After you evaluate those changes/fixes, then start thinking about aero. You may find that just the alignment will settle the car down a LOT more.
--kC
[QUOTE]I suspect that the alignment being more geared towards autocross is a large part of it, [/QUOTE]YA THINK!?!?!?! :lol:
So you're saying your off-the-shelf auto-x suspension is going to feel 'better' at 85/95 mph with an auto-x alignment if you throw aero at it?? Alignments for track/highspeed and low speed auto-x are hardly ever complimentary.
I say, set your alignment better for high speed.
Then, after you fix your alignment for better settings, think about getting properly tuned shocks and springs, set for road racing. Many times, the valving is also different as are the spring rates between the two disciplines. There is a huge difference between off-the-shelf shock, and those made FOR the discipline you're attempting.
After you evaluate those changes/fixes, then start thinking about aero. You may find that just the alignment will settle the car down a LOT more.
--kC
| elgorey | 03-06-2007 01:49 PM |
for high speed stuff, try zeroing out the toe. This is what most SM drivers run. Small tweaks according to the track, but overall you want as little toe as possible in a momentum car.
on the subject of splitters/airdams, roadracegear has completed a prototype for first gen miatas and should be available soon. not much help to the m2 however. As mentioned in this thread however, it will not help your instability problem (might worsen it)
[url]http://www.roadracegear.com/applications.asp[/url]
and lastly, due to the inherent aerodynamics of production cars, there will always be lift generated at speed.
The floaty feeling will always be there on fast corners, learn to trust the car and feel the tires slip will go a long way to feeling more comfortable with it.
on the subject of splitters/airdams, roadracegear has completed a prototype for first gen miatas and should be available soon. not much help to the m2 however. As mentioned in this thread however, it will not help your instability problem (might worsen it)
[url]http://www.roadracegear.com/applications.asp[/url]
and lastly, due to the inherent aerodynamics of production cars, there will always be lift generated at speed.
The floaty feeling will always be there on fast corners, learn to trust the car and feel the tires slip will go a long way to feeling more comfortable with it.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét