Most liked posts in thread: Testing our R56 in the wind tunnel

  1. Nathan

    Nathan Founder

    Mar 30, 2009
    25,144
    10,052
    113
    Writer
    Short North
    Ratings:
    +10,069 / 0 / -0
    Thats a nifty looking mighty big wing.
     
  2. Savvy

    Savvy Well-Known Member
    Lifetime Supporter

    Apr 16, 2010
    6,832
    2,011
    113
    Mechanical Engineer/DA Civilian
    DE
    Ratings:
    +2,024 / 0 / -0
    Ok. Your data sheets look pretty... but you have a lot of explaining to do regarding the data presented. None of it makes any sense. If you want to increase grip to the tires at speed, your measured forces should be higher not lower.

    It's like you are trying to float your car in the wind tunnel... not make an effective aerodynamic solution to increase grip at speed.
     
  3. Zapski

    Zapski Well-Known Member

    May 4, 2011
    2,099
    889
    113
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +938 / 0 / -0
    I'd also like to see more data about that splitter.

    Thanks!
     
  4. Savvy

    Savvy Well-Known Member
    Lifetime Supporter

    Apr 16, 2010
    6,832
    2,011
    113
    Mechanical Engineer/DA Civilian
    DE
    Ratings:
    +2,024 / 0 / -0
    Appears to be nothing more then a marketing gimmick to me. The fact that they are presenting averages of two data points.... smh.
     
  5. Angib

    Angib New Member

    Nov 25, 2009
    824
    425
    0
    (Old) England
    Ratings:
    +425 / 0 / -0
    That works, doesn't it? From 98lb of lift on the stock car to 88-122lb of downforce is a fairly big change though most of it is at the back - which matches the traditional ideal of a car that oversteers at low speed but understeers at high speed.

    However the drag penalty of the aero kit, a 14-19% increase, is surprisingly high, though in lift/drag terms (186-200lb extra downforce for 32-44lb extra drag) it isn't bad.

    Great to see data like this presented publicly - very confident/courageous.