Page 26 of 33 FirstFirst ... 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 520 of 647
  1. #501
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1BADBET View Post
    How much will laying the windshield back help or how far back before it makes a difference?
    2-3 degrees will make a measurable difference. 5 is significant. 8-10 is a big deal.

    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!


  2. #502
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,361
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    I wanted to seal off the openings on the top of the cowl where fresh air enters as mentioned many pages ago in this thread. This will increase air pressure on the top of the cowl so I'll get more down force in conjunction with a new hood to cowl seal which will be installed after final paint. I decided to use a reproduction screen I already had and modify it to seal off the openings. I used 3/32 EPDM rubber sheet and it's held in place with # 10 - 5/8"Phillips pan head screws and nylock nuts with 3/16" body washers to spread out the clamping force. It's kind of heavy with the steel hardware so I'll probably switch to plastic hardware. The higher the air pressure, the tighter the seal will be. The car very rarely ever gets wet so I'm not concerned too much with drainage but if I'm on a trip and it rains I'll just pop the screen out.

    Here's the pics!



    [img width=800 height=600]http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff292/NOTATA/The%2014%20Car%20Performance%20Therapy/015_zpsdymqh7os.jpg[/img]



    Last edited by NOT A TA; 05-13-2016 at 05:35 AM.

  3. #503
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    That's a good idea for these dual purpose hot rods. Thanks for sharing John.
    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  4. #504
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    239
    Country Flag: United States

    Default





    Not related to video: If one can calculate the amount of expansion due to temp change, it could in theory help decide where to put vents and the like. Seeing as rate of expansion isnt a very dynamic thing... even better. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ai...ies-d_156.html

  5. #505
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Thank you for sharing the video. I am appreciative and a the same time, want to point out some mistakes these guys made.

    The one thing that video should teach everyone ... is that just bolting stuff on ... doesn't mean it will work properly. If we can't test in a wind tunnel, then we do need to test on track. The car owner in this this video had 99% rear downforce & 1% front downforce ... as he had it bolted on. Then he made some changes to achieve 30% front downforce. Frankly, their approach was wrong and they missed the cause of the problem.

    The approach should have been to
    A. Test the car at ride height.
    B. Test the car compressed a specific amount based on the target front downforce compressing the springs.
    C. Test the car in full dive ... whatever that amount is.

    Instead, they raised the rear of the car, which we could assume put the car at the correct rake (or not). But the car is higher off the ground and that does affect the results. The "B" test would tell them if they achieved their front & rear down force goals for high speed (120-140 mph) corners where you are flat out, not braking. The "C" test would have told them how much front down force they achieved ... and they could have played with different rear wing angles to find a balance ... then re-do their "A" test.

    FYI: The "B" test is where we trim out the rear wing to achieve a slightly "Tight" handling car for safety at top speeds. Let's look at scale numbers for our sample car in the shop (Obviously no down force):
    LF 900 RF 900 53%
    LR 800 RR 800 47%

    Ideally we want to use aero downforce to help us:
    * Turn better in tight corners - so we need more front load
    * Have rear grip & stability on high speed corners - so we need more rear load

    Just for conversation sake, let's say we can get 400# of total downforce for 80 mph corners. We'd do "C" test with the car in full dive. Ideally, we'd want that to look like this on the wind tunnel load cells for optimum turning ability. These are our target numbers for mid-speed corners.
    LF 1045 RF 1045 55%
    LR 855 RR 855 45%
    * In other words a 2% shift to loading the front tires more. That is shifting the car's weight bias from 53/47 F/R to 55/45 F/R.

    Tip: This is why I like to build a car with different splitter lengths. In a wind tunnel test, we'll swap splitters until we acheive the target. Even if we never see a wind tunnel ... when we're at the track and the front tires are NOT getting loaded enough in the tight & medium corners, I'll switch to a longer splitter. Or the other way: It turns great in the low speed stuff, but isn't stable at high speeds ... if we're out of rear downforce options ... we can switch to a shorter splitter in the front. Not ideal. Because frankly we want all the total downforce we can get. But it needs to be balanced.


    For very high speed corners (120-140mph) where we don't brake ... frankly, we may be flat out and accelerating ... we'd do a "B" test with the front end just barely pushed down to account for front downforce. (This requires testing & tuning in the wind tunnel) Let's say we have 800# of total downforce at this speed. Ideally, we'd want that to look like this on the wind tunnel load cells for optimum high speed stability. These are our target numbers for high-speed corners.
    LF 1071 RF 1071 51%
    LR 1029 RR 1029 49%
    * In other words a 2% shift to loading the rear tires more.

    Make sense? That should be what we're looking for, targeting & working towards.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Back to the Nissan in the video. Their splitter mounting design was flawed. It was long (going forward), but un-supported at the front. Splitter deflection is a loss of downforce energy.

    When ANY panel deflects under downforce ... sideforce too ... the deflection wastes energy, meaning we don't get the net downforce possible. So had there been 80-100# or more force pushing down on the splitter ... we won't see any of it ... until the defection stops. So if the splitter deflects more & more ... all the way up to 80# ... then stops deflecting ... and we have 100# of force there ... only 20# of it will get to the chassis & tires. Where if we supported the splitter from deflecting at all ... we'd get all 100# of that downforce ... which is GRIP!





    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  6. #506
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Anaheim, Ca
    Posts
    169
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    If I shave the drip rail on just the A pillar to reduce drag and leave the rest of it on will the top section act as a spill plate keeping the air on the roof or would I be better off shaving the whole thing?


    JORDAN

  7. #507
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1BADBET View Post
    If I shave the drip rail on just the A pillar to reduce drag and leave the rest of it on will the top section act as a spill plate keeping the air on the roof or would I be better off shaving the whole thing?
    You're better off shaving the whole drip rail off. The drip rail is so turbulent, it doesn't help anything.


    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  8. #508
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
    Posts
    576
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    And this is why people follow your every breath! These guys spent $2000 an hour and really didn't help their car.
    So when you say compress the spring, do you mean adjust the ride height to simulate dive or downforce, or actually compress the spring?
    Craig Scholl
    CJD Automotive, LLC
    Jacksonville, Florida
    904-400-1802
    www.cjdautomotive.com

    "I own a Mopar, I already know it won't be in stock, won't ship tomorrow, and won't fit without modification."

  9. #509
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sccacuda View Post
    And this is why people follow your every breath! These guys spent $2000 an hour and really didn't help their car.
    So when you say compress the spring, do you mean adjust the ride height to simulate dive or downforce, or actually compress the spring?

    Good question Craig.

    We're not compressing the spring, as that would require mechanical devices. We use one of four routes, depending on the car, to fake the compression & drop the nose of the car.
    1. Adjust the spring height on the coil-over or with a weight jacker.
    2. Pull out pre-determined length spacers in the coil overs.
    3. Replace the spring with solid spacer.
    4. Spacers & shims under the bump stops.

    What that looks like is ....
    1.
    We already figured out how many turns to relax the spring adjuster or weight jacker in the shop to achieve the target faux compression. So if we want the nose to compress/drop 3/4" of an inch (at the crossmember) then we figured out how many turns to adjust the coil-over adjusters or weight jackers in the shop. If it needs 4.5 turns on each side to get there ... telling a crew guy to relax each spring by 4.5 turns at the windtunnel will be pretty quick.

    2. Quicker still is to use spacers. In the shop, where it's not costing $1,000's of dollars per hour, we cut spring spacers in a U-style that equal the drop we want. So when we have the car at ride height in the wind tunnel, we can throw a jack under the car & pull out the spacer on each side in under a minute. It can be the difference between getting 20 airflow tests in a day versus 15.

    3. In some cars, with coil springs separate from the shocks, like all NASCAR Cup, Busch, Truck, ARCA, etc ... it is easy to throw a jack under the car & simply pull the spring out. Then we can put in a solid spacer (or shorter spring) that we pre-determined in the shop to achieve the target nose drop we're looking to test.

    4. If the car has bump stops on the front, we simply remove the front springs & use spacers in the bump stops. We'll put in several thick spacers (or 1 super tall spacer) under the bump stops to achieve ride height. Then pull out whatever spacers we need to achieve different nose drops for testing. Again, we pre-determine the amount in the shop, so it's clear, quick & concise at the wind tunnel.

    The other thing that is key, and the wind tunnel the Nissan was in does this, is to turn the car into a slight state of yaw, so the wind flows over the nose & the car at an angle ... like it does in the real world when the car is turning. It simply provides a more accurate picture of how much downforce we're getting overall, as well as front to rear balance.



    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  10. #510
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    409
    Country Flag: United States

    Default Designing Aerodynamics for Track Performance

    Thanks for the great info Ron. I should have my Volvo project home in about 2 weeks to measure the suspension for your analysis. I will send the data to you as soon as it is available.

    I have a question regarding the effectiveness of the rear spoiler I put on my car. It is active so it will come up at speed or can be lifted via a power window switch. I wanted to create more downforce since the back of the car is so tapered and slick. I will balance it out with a spoiler and splitter in the front. Here is a quick video of the spoiler. Do you think it will do what I want it to do or was it a huge waste of money?

    http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...om%2F155415413

  11. #511
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 68EFIvert View Post
    Thanks for the great info Ron. I should have my Volvo project home in about 2 weeks to measure the suspension for your analysis. I will send the data to you as soon as it is available.

    I have a question regarding the effectiveness of the rear spoiler I put on my car. It is active so it will come up at speed or can be lifted via a power window switch. I wanted to create more downforce since the back of the car is so tapered and slick. I will balance it out with a spoiler and splitter in the front. Here is a quick video of the spoiler. Do you think it will do what I want it to do or was it a huge waste of money?

    http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...om%2F155415413
    How effective it will be is partly determined by the airflow over the roof. Can you post a side view of the body shape?

    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  12. #512
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    409
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Here are a couple pictures from my build thread. I did shave the drip rails for looks and it sounds like it will allow the air to flow better as well. I will be using flush mount front and rear glass. Thanks for the help.
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...f7ecd9c5b0.jpg
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...a8a232d1f6.jpg
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...b48bcbf101.jpg

    Here is a picture of what we have done so far with the front. We have angled the headlights and are about to start on the lower valance and splitter.
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...ba7846f339.jpg

    This is a stock car but a better picture of the side. I have made quite a few changes to the back fins with my car as you may be able to see from the photos.
    http://www.motor-car.co.uk/images/1/...-side-view.jpg

  13. #513
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 68EFIvert View Post
    Here are a couple pictures from my build thread. I did shave the drip rails for looks and it sounds like it will allow the air to flow better as well. I will be using flush mount front and rear glass. Thanks for the help.
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...f7ecd9c5b0.jpg
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...a8a232d1f6.jpg
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...b48bcbf101.jpg

    Here is a picture of what we have done so far with the front. We have angled the headlights and are about to start on the lower valance and splitter.
    http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...ba7846f339.jpg

    This is a stock car but a better picture of the side. I have made quite a few changes to the back fins with my car as you may be able to see from the photos.
    http://www.motor-car.co.uk/images/1/...-side-view.jpg

    The roof shape is good, but short. You'll probably see 65% of the airflow over the roof hitting the rear spoiler.

    The rear spoiler is cool, because you can change angles to help you achieve different goals. It won't be 100% effective as it could be, because your design lifts the base of the spoiler off the deck lid substantially. Remember, with spoiler design, the spoiler just slows the air to create a high pressure area onto the decklid. The decklid is where the forces actually push down. So with that gap under your spoiler allowing the air to flow through it ... you won't get the same downforce for spoiler angle, compared to a spoiler of the same height & angle if it were deck mounted.

    Best wishes!


    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  14. #514
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
    Posts
    576
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Sutton View Post

    Remember, with spoiler design, the spoiler just slows the air to create a high pressure area onto the decklid. The decklid is where the forces actually push down. So with that gap under your spoiler allowing the air to flow through it ... you won't get the same downforce for spoiler angle, compared to a spoiler of the same height & angle if it were deck mounted.

    Best wishes!


    Question on this. How does the transition from the deck lid effect the spoilers efficiency? I'm talking about where the front leading edge of the spoiler attaches to the deck lid. Some spoilers "set up" a 1/8-3/8" off the lid, I assume to take into account varying differences in production spoilers and deck lids. Is this a small or big deal?

    Craig Scholl
    CJD Automotive, LLC
    Jacksonville, Florida
    904-400-1802
    www.cjdautomotive.com

    "I own a Mopar, I already know it won't be in stock, won't ship tomorrow, and won't fit without modification."

  15. #515
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Seattle area
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Its the down force versus drag.Like you see on the NASCAR race cars.They have different AERO packages for different tracks.And on a street car you need to be able to see out the back.that why some people uses clear "Lexan"on their spoilers.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  16. #516
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    409
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Thanks for the simple and clear answer Ron. So my spoiler is not a TOTAL waste of money. I wanted something that would help out but not ruin the lines of the car when I didn't need it. Like everything it is a sacrifice between two different goals.

  17. #517
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sccacuda View Post
    Question on this. How does the transition from the deck lid effect the spoilers efficiency? I'm talking about where the front leading edge of the spoiler attaches to the deck lid. Some spoilers "set up" a 1/8-3/8" off the lid, I assume to take into account varying differences in production spoilers and deck lids. Is this a small or big deal?


    That's a good question Craig.

    I don't have any wind tunnel experience with that type of OEM spoiler. Some things I know that may helps us understand it are:
    * Anytime we have a gap between the spoiler & the decklid, we're losing pressure & downforce on the decklid. Just not sure how much 1/8" - 3/8" will decrease it.
    * Anytime the face of a surface is curved upwards (in this case the front side of the spoiler) it direct the surface airflow upwards and reduces the pressure & downforce on the panel in front of it.
    * On the leading edge of this type of OEM spoiler, where it has kind of a bull nose, I don't know if that helps create any additional downforce or just adds turbulence. We'd have to test it to see.

    Overall, I think the loss of downforce of the OEM style spoiler you show compared to a straight blade style spoiler of the same height could be anywhere from 20-40%.


    P.S. LOVE the spoiler extension or wickerbill. That's a very good route to keep OEM style & achieve more downforce.




    Last edited by Ron Sutton; 05-18-2016 at 12:25 PM.
    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  18. #518
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 68EFIvert View Post
    Thanks for the simple and clear answer Ron. So my spoiler is not a TOTAL waste of money. I wanted something that would help out but not ruin the lines of the car when I didn't need it. Like everything it is a sacrifice between two different goals.

    It will be an effective spoiler. And it looks cool. Double win.

    Best wishes!




    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

  19. #519
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    239
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Sutton View Post
    Thank you for sharing the video. I am appreciative and a the same time, want to point out some mistakes these guys made.

    The one thing that video should teach everyone ... is that just bolting stuff on ... doesn't mean it will work properly. If we can't test in a wind tunnel, then we do need to test on track. The car owner in this this video had 99% rear downforce & 1% front downforce ... as he had it bolted on. Then he made some changes to achieve 30% front downforce. Frankly, their approach was wrong and they missed the cause of the problem.

    The approach should have been to
    A. Test the car at ride height.
    B. Test the car compressed a specific amount based on the target front downforce compressing the springs.
    C. Test the car in full dive ... whatever that amount is.

    Instead, they raised the rear of the car, which we could assume put the car at the correct rake (or not). But the car is higher off the ground and that does affect the results. The "B" test would tell them if they achieved their front & rear down force goals for high speed (120-140 mph) corners where you are flat out, not braking. The "C" test would have told them how much front down force they achieved ... and they could have played with different rear wing angles to find a balance ... then re-do their "A" test.

    FYI: The "B" test is where we trim out the rear wing to achieve a slightly "Tight" handling car for safety at top speeds. Let's look at scale numbers for our sample car in the shop (Obviously no down force):
    LF 900 RF 900 53%
    LR 800 RR 800 47%

    Ideally we want to use aero downforce to help us:
    * Turn better in tight corners - so we need more front load
    * Have rear grip & stability on high speed corners - so we need more rear load

    Just for conversation sake, let's say we can get 400# of total downforce for 80 mph corners. We'd do "C" test with the car in full dive. Ideally, we'd want that to look like this on the wind tunnel load cells for optimum turning ability. These are our target numbers for mid-speed corners.
    LF 1045 RF 1045 55%
    LR 855 RR 855 45%
    * In other words a 2% shift to loading the front tires more. That is shifting the car's weight bias from 53/47 F/R to 55/45 F/R.

    Tip: This is why I like to build a car with different splitter lengths. In a wind tunnel test, we'll swap splitters until we acheive the target. Even if we never see a wind tunnel ... when we're at the track and the front tires are NOT getting loaded enough in the tight & medium corners, I'll switch to a longer splitter. Or the other way: It turns great in the low speed stuff, but isn't stable at high speeds ... if we're out of rear downforce options ... we can switch to a shorter splitter in the front. Not ideal. Because frankly we want all the total downforce we can get. But it needs to be balanced.


    For very high speed corners (120-140mph) where we don't brake ... frankly, we may be flat out and accelerating ... we'd do a "B" test with the front end just barely pushed down to account for front downforce. (This requires testing & tuning in the wind tunnel) Let's say we have 800# of total downforce at this speed. Ideally, we'd want that to look like this on the wind tunnel load cells for optimum high speed stability. These are our target numbers for high-speed corners.
    LF 1071 RF 1071 51%
    LR 1029 RR 1029 49%
    * In other words a 2% shift to loading the rear tires more.

    Make sense? That should be what we're looking for, targeting & working towards.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Back to the Nissan in the video. Their splitter mounting design was flawed. It was long (going forward), but un-supported at the front. Splitter deflection is a loss of downforce energy.

    When ANY panel deflects under downforce ... sideforce too ... the deflection wastes energy, meaning we don't get the net downforce possible. So had there been 80-100# or more force pushing down on the splitter ... we won't see any of it ... until the defection stops. So if the splitter deflects more & more ... all the way up to 80# ... then stops deflecting ... and we have 100# of force there ... only 20# of it will get to the chassis & tires. Where if we supported the splitter from deflecting at all ... we'd get all 100# of that downforce ... which is GRIP!





    Love the analysis. Clears up quite a bit and sheds light on things that shouldve been obvious.

    Now if we could get you to play with CFD...lol

  20. #520
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    2,386
    Country Flag: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HellPhish89 View Post
    Love the analysis. Clears up quite a bit and sheds light on things that shouldve been obvious.

    Now if we could get you to play with CFD...lol

    Glad the analysis made sense.

    Frankly, for me to go spend time with CFD, I'd have to have a client project funding me to do so. Even though I am "semi-retired" ... yeah right ... LOL ... I am staying crazy busy these days with my workshops, suspension & chassis designs for commercial clients, suspension set-ups for individual clients, Track Warrior parts & complete cars, brake designs, etc, etc. I don't have any major clients hiring me for aerodynamic design. So, I'll just share what I already know on these forums.


    Feel free to chime in or ask technical questions. I am here to help where I can.

    Ron Sutton

    Ron Sutton Race Technology
    Your One Stop, Turn & Go Fast, Car Building Resource Center for Autocross, Track, Road Racing & Triple Duty Pro-Touring Cars

    Check out our 400 Page Car Building Catalog HERE

    Features: Suspension, Chassis, Cages, Brakes, Rear Ends, Engines, Transmisssions, Aero & Much, Much More!

Page 26 of 33 FirstFirst ... 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... LastLast


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •