Carbon Fiber R34
08-07-2007, 02:43 PM
#51
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearwater,FL
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i take it test car doesnt mean anythign to you? 3 and i find it funny how you talk about the drag on the car. you do know they can raise it or lower
raise it. oh btw nice pic
oh kinda of curious what you think the drag on the denso supra one would be and most likely you thikn the silver one is a snow plow also.
i understand y ou think that the GTR looks like a snow plow. but what i do not understand is, how you can not see if that snow plow look helps the car or not. obviously the engineers who designed that look felt it helps.
raise it. oh btw nice pic
oh kinda of curious what you think the drag on the denso supra one would be and most likely you thikn the silver one is a snow plow also.
i understand y ou think that the GTR looks like a snow plow. but what i do not understand is, how you can not see if that snow plow look helps the car or not. obviously the engineers who designed that look felt it helps.
2) The picture you posted is going to have a ton less drag.
Look at the surface area of each car. You are telling me that front end will not contribute to drag? With that train of thought I could stick a liitle spliter on the front of a bus and all of a sudden it is a areodynamic monster...
Last edited by Digital_Damage; 08-07-2007 at 02:46 PM.
08-07-2007, 02:44 PM
#52
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearwater,FL
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know why you seem to think that this would produce so much drag. looks like a widebody to me so... is it the sharp front fenders that make you think that way? oh well i think it's pretty badass, just needs a paint job that's all. I mean every part seems to be pretty pricey on that car, just try finding out how much an ARC racing intercooler is, even their standard cores cost and arm and a leg.
Last edited by Digital_Damage; 08-07-2007 at 02:48 PM.
08-07-2007, 03:38 PM
#53
Registered
My thought is that racing aerodynamics deal less with drag than with using aerodynamics to enhance vehicle dynamics via downforce and turbulence control.
If a race car's main concern was slipperiness, they need to look something like a sideways teardrop or a fish or have their wheels covered and such.
If a race car's main concern was slipperiness, they need to look something like a sideways teardrop or a fish or have their wheels covered and such.
08-07-2007, 04:27 PM
#55
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearwater,FL
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My thought is that racing aerodynamics deal less with drag than with using aerodynamics to enhance vehicle dynamics via downforce and turbulence control.
If a race car's main concern was slipperiness, they need to look something like a sideways teardrop or a fish or have their wheels covered and such.
If a race car's main concern was slipperiness, they need to look something like a sideways teardrop or a fish or have their wheels covered and such.
ummm like F1 cars?
08-07-2007, 04:44 PM
#56
Registered
Yes, thank you for pointing that out. F1 cars are balanced in all respects (downforce, turbulence, and drag) for performance. They represent the apex for car dynamics. F1 cars are essentially inverse wings with engines. As anyone knows, the cross section of a wing is teardrop shaped.
08-07-2007, 05:59 PM
#57
Registered
1) How are they going to lower it? It is already on the ground.
2) The picture you posted is going to have a ton less drag.
Look at the surface area of each car. You are telling me that front end will not contribute to drag? With that train of thought I could stick a liitle spliter on the front of a bus and all of a sudden it is a areodynamic monster...
2) The picture you posted is going to have a ton less drag.
Look at the surface area of each car. You are telling me that front end will not contribute to drag? With that train of thought I could stick a liitle spliter on the front of a bus and all of a sudden it is a areodynamic monster...
the reason why i brought up wing lower and raising, because i can not see where you think the car it self will have high drag when you post a another gtr with almost the same set up. so i automactially thought you was talking about the wing.
any ways we can go back and forth, but i think its best i stop. i not understanding your terms.
my bad for misunderstanding you /bow
Last edited by alfy28; 08-07-2007 at 06:04 PM.
08-07-2007, 07:41 PM
#58
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearwater,FL
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my bad, i was talking about the wing it self (becasue you post another gtr with almos the same set up on ride height) , they can either lower or raise it. but one thing i do not uderstand is, you see both those 2 gtrs, they almost look texactly the same but yet you think the test car has higher drag then then Motul gtr. they are pretty much the same width, same ride height, but yet the test car has higher drag? that is where i am confused. t
the reason why i brought up wing lower and raising, because i can not see where you think the car it self will have high drag when you post a another gtr with almost the same set up. so i automactially thought you was talking about the wing.
any ways we can go back and forth, but i think its best i stop. i not understanding your terms.
my bad for misunderstanding you /bow
the reason why i brought up wing lower and raising, because i can not see where you think the car it self will have high drag when you post a another gtr with almost the same set up. so i automactially thought you was talking about the wing.
any ways we can go back and forth, but i think its best i stop. i not understanding your terms.
my bad for misunderstanding you /bow
I't might look like the ride height is the same but they are very different. If you take a look at the wheels you can see the surface area of the front of the car is almost double that of the other gtr.
If you look at the doors you will see the black one has about 6 or 8 inches of skirt instead of actualy lowering the car. The other car has actualy been droped so low the fenders are actualty the tallest point.
That is what I was getting at, hence the snow plow comment because the front of the car is so tall.
08-07-2007, 08:07 PM
#59
Piston-free 07.11.2007
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, add me to the "CF Hater Club."
Second, even with the ridiculously tall skirts and front clip, it's still seems to ride too high. I especially dislike how it seems that the middle of the front clip looks to dip down lower than the sides.
Finally,
Second, even with the ridiculously tall skirts and front clip, it's still seems to ride too high. I especially dislike how it seems that the middle of the front clip looks to dip down lower than the sides.
Finally,
08-07-2007, 08:28 PM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: No. VA
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been pointed out that the carbon fiber car is a TEST car. Does anyone know exactly what they were testing? Perhaps aerodynamics were not important for the tests they were conducting.
08-07-2007, 10:23 PM
#62
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Clearwater,FL
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-07-2007, 10:31 PM
#63
Its all about Style...
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 3,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-07-2007, 11:52 PM
#66
RX8 HA HA
Thread Starter
how bout I turn this thread into a nascar thread,,that would be sick!!
quick, someone pass me a 6 pack & my redheaded cousin, the tent is pitched and ready to camp!
quick, someone pass me a 6 pack & my redheaded cousin, the tent is pitched and ready to camp!
08-08-2007, 10:57 AM
#69
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
sorry, but Rodger is on vacation...you'll need to settle for ONE midge. 
08-08-2007, 12:05 PM
#72
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CARBONRX-8
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
4
10-05-2015 03:46 PM