Laile Under Panel ventilation

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by billwot

That's a solution to a non-existing problem.

I think it's more of a solution looking for a problem. If you look closely at the marketing, they seem to be confused about what problem they're actually solving. That makes me suspicious of the product from the outset.

Originally Posted by shiumai

Is that the same as this?
http://www.kamispeed.com/Beatrush-Al...br.s564000.htm

Originally Posted by soundman98

i would consider hood vents better, as it would route the air over the car. generally it's better practice to reduce air underneath the car...

If you read the description on the Kamispeed site, Beatrush is marketing it as an aero accessory that is somehow supposed to increase downforce rather than as a cooling solution. I'm no aeronautical engineer, but that claim seems like bullshit.

Originally Posted by shiumai

I agree that there is definitely a demand for under-hood cooling for the FI folk. But I've never seen any under hood temp data to show that the louvered underpanels work.

Originally Posted by sygfrid

I had one recently installed on my FRS with UEL headers since, compared to stock that has a heat shield, I noticed that the engine bay's a lot hotter even after applying ceramic coating to the headers. With the Laile (Beatrush) under panel, I noticed that the engine bay cools faster after a couple of minutes of parking it.

I wouldn't believe any anecdotes of any product providing cooler temps, even when measured with an IR thermometer. There are too many opportunities for confirmation bias.

What you need instead is footage with an IR camera to see the entire engine bay with hot and cool spots. In the Jeep world we had some claims made about underhood heat that completely fell apart when someone did before and after IR videos with certain parts showing what was actually happening. People had taken measurements with IR thermometers to support their claims, but it turned out they were pointing them at hot spots that didn't capture where the cooling was actually happening. Most likely confirmation bias led them to hunt for those hot spots to give them the results they wanted, without even realizing they were doing it. The IR footage removed some of the ability to alter the results.

Originally Posted by billwot

No, I just never understood why folks obsess about airflow through engine compartment of cars with water-cooled engines. Unless the design airflow is damaged or altered, its just not a problem.

Some vehicles (perhaps ours, perhaps not, I don't know) can develop issues with heat trapped under the hood that can affect sensors and ignition coils, cause heat soak in the fuel system and reduce the life of plastic parts that become brittle from being overheated. The engine itself is perfectly content with its coolant flow from the radiator while the things attached to it are baking. Usually, however, those issues are a problem at slow speeds or when stopped rather than when moving.

That doesn't stop anybody from misunderstanding the problem and saying, "Derp! I gots to get rid of all that heat under my hood because it caused a problem in my uncle's 1980 ricebox!"

[ls1ac]

I let it be the first time, but putting hot less dense air into the space under the car that has a vacuum helping to create down force is not going to help the handling. there is a reason the bottom of race cars are paneled.

[venturaII]

^^Exactly my thoughts. Are they trying to solve heat or add downforce? Dumping engine compartment air under the car (or anywhere, really) will help with heat. It'll make downforce worse, if dumped under the car..

[Tcoat]

Love when an old thread get's resurrected and so many want to debate with people that have not been here in 3 or 4 years.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

I let it be the first time, but putting hot less dense air into the space under the car that has a vacuum helping to create down force is not going to help the handling. there is a reason the bottom of race cars are paneled.

Originally Posted by venturaII

^^Exactly my thoughts. Are they trying to solve heat or add downforce? Dumping engine compartment air under the car (or anywhere, really) will help with heat. It'll make downforce worse, if dumped under the car..

Let's be real here. At the speeds these car reach, even when track modified, the slight difference in air temperature underneath will have no discernable difference on handling.

[venturaII]

Cabin fever.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Let's be real here. At the speeds these car reach, even when track modified, the slight difference in air temperature underneath will have no discernable difference on handling.

I don't think ls1ac and certainly not myself are saying anything to correlate heat with downforce. Simply just that dumping more air under the car is NOT going to improve downforce, as the original diagram is trying to imply.

[Ernest72]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Let's be real here. At the speeds these car reach, even when track modified, the slight difference in air temperature underneath will have no discernable difference on handling.

Beat me to it. Best it does is help with heat, however marginal that might be.

Certainly did not feel any handling benefit at highway speeds. Unlike when I put the front lip and sideskirts on, where I noticed an improvement on those crazy windy days. But those are mostly cosmetic as well under normal driving conditions.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

I let it be the first time, but putting hot less dense air into the space under the car that has a vacuum helping to create down force is not going to help the handling. there is a reason the bottom of race cars are paneled.

Originally Posted by venturaII

^^Exactly my thoughts. Are they trying to solve heat or add downforce? Dumping engine compartment air under the car (or anywhere, really) will help with heat. It'll make downforce worse, if dumped under the car..

Originally Posted by venturaII

I don't think ls1ac and certainly not myself are saying anything to correlate heat with downforce. Simply just that dumping more air under the car is NOT going to improve downforce, as the original diagram is trying to imply.

UMMMMMMM

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

UMMMMMMM

Yes, I read that, and I'm going on record as saying I assumed he chose his words poorly and really was meaning dumping ANY air (in this case, heated air, though it has zero effect on the situation...) under the car was not a good thing for downforce...

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Yes, I read that, and I'm going on record as saying I assumed he chose his words poorly and really was meaning dumping ANY air (in this case, heated air, though it has zero effect on the situation...) under the car was not a good thing for downforce...

Nah he was very specific about heat and density. It could probably be proven with math but the real world effects just would not be there.

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Nah he was very specific about heat and density.
.

Hmmm...in that case then, hot air under the car would be better than cold, dense air. Less drag, right?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by venturaII

Hmmm...in that case then, hot air under the car would be better than cold, dense air. Less drag, right?

It rises though so it pushes you up at the same time.


Did we just invent hover tech? I am calling the patent office.

[ls1ac]

Thank you for the understanding, any added air under the car reduces the down force. (the whole purpose of the splitter under paneling side skirts and rear diffuser)
I will have to go back to the books to find definitive reasons why hot air reduces lift on a wing. Somehow just stuck in my mind.
This is negative lift or down force.