Functional Aero Parts and their effects ?

[plucas]

Originally Posted by Wonderbar

Type 2 should be marginally less effective, but will be so because of the slightly shorter body and smaller strakes. Maybe @plucas can plug some insight to the theory.

Would be less effective most likely but by how much, I couldn't say.

Originally Posted by gramicci101

That makes sense. What other aero parts are there on the front end for them to direct aero to?

Also, interestingly, the GT300 BRZ doesn't seem to use them, from a brief image search. And my ipad doesn't seem to realize that brief is actually a word and I didn't really mean to say grief. Dammit.

Just winglets.

GT300 is a totally different animal (full out race car) and hard to compare its setup to a road car.

[gramicci101]

Most of the street cars I'm finding pictures of do not have winglets or any other aero, so I assume they're only there because carbon fiber makes you faster. The race cars all have functional aero integrated into their bodywork.

Then there's this guy. I think he might have room for a few more surfaces on the doors or something.

[Boxer486]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

Most of the street cars I'm finding pictures of do not have winglets or any other aero, so I assume they're only there because carbon fiber makes you faster. The race cars all have functional aero integrated into their bodywork.

Stop looking at individual parts and try to understand how the sum of parts interacts to make the whole.

Also, just because everyone might be doing the same thing doesn't mean they necessarily know better or worse either.

If you look at Formula 1 aerodynamic changes over the past 20 years you'll kill yourself trying to figure it out without understanding the principles and contexts of why they choose to do what they do for any given season on any given car.

Speaking of winglets, look at the ones on the side of your OE tail lights. Guess Toyota felt like spending the money to put a bit of extra rice on the car because there was empty space. One reason I won't upgrade to aftermarket tails if they don't have them.

[gramicci101]

I'm not, I'm trying to figure out how each piece contributes to the overall picture. For instance, @plucas said that canards should be used to direct airflow to other aero, such as winglets, but they also create lower pressure at the front wheel well. If your car has no other aero to direct airflow to, then the canards' primary purpose is to reduce pressure in the wheel well, which has several different effects. It pulls out heat from the brakes and the reduced pressure helps to alleviate lift, which lets the tires get better contact with the road, which provides better steering response. It all interacts, and I'm trying to see how small changes in one area will produce significant effects in other areas.

And I won't even pretend to understand F1. Adrian Newey is a wizard.

[plucas]

F1 aero is all based from the rules. Cannot use them as examples for most things.

[gramicci101]

@plucas, do you have a representative picture of a car with all the normal aero bits and how they affect airflow? For a big picture perspective, more than anything.

[dradernh]

Guys, this book is your Aero 101, written in English for normal folks by the aerodynamics columnist for Racecar Engineering magazine: [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Competition-Car-Aerodynamics-Practical-Handbook/dp/0857330071"]Competition Car Aerodynamics: A Practical Handbook, 2nd Edition: Simon McBeath: 9780857330079: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]


If you have any serious interest in aero, this book will provide you with an excellent grounding in the fundamentals. I reread it every winter when the tracks in my region are closed, and always come away with a deeper understanding of those fundamentals.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Fast forward to about 2:50

The rear end of the S2000 looks really squirrely even with all that aero...

[CSG David]

Originally Posted by solidONE

The rear end of the S2000 looks really squirrely even with all that aero...

It's not that bad actually. It's just the nature of the car.

[solidONE]

I guess I've never driven one hard enough to notice. They railed when I drove them at a more street friendly pace.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I guess I've never driven one hard enough to notice. They railed when I drove them at a more street friendly pace.

If it drives like it's on rails...

[ddeflyer]

About the JDM underbody kit you asked about in the first thread: I have it on my car, got it before I ever took the car to the track so I can't talk about the affect on track performance but I can talk about road performance.

It makes the car quieter on the freeway. That is why I got it, and I suspect for all but the most decked out and finished track car, you would only get that underbody aero for the n in NVH. That said, if you are going for reduced noise you will get much much much more bang for your buck by sectioning a sheet of dynamat and throwing that around your car's interior (especially the rear wheel arches).

[Wonderbar]

For us non track living "normies", any reduced drag like underbody panels can help with normal freeway stability and increased mpg at sustained cruising on highway trips. Of course there are too many variables to say 'how worth it' they are.

[CSG David]

Originally Posted by Wonderbar

For us non track living "normies", any reduced drag like underbody panels can help with normal freeway stability and increased mpg at sustained cruising on highway trips. Of course there are too many variables to say 'how worth it' they are.

Underbody will reduce drag slightly simply because the airflow is streamlined. Keep in mind, you will get less pockets of air being formed underneath the car which can cause additional noise while you're driving. This is a 25k-28k USD car so the characteristics you get are pretty astonishing for its price point. Also, the car is incredibly stable at speed or high speeds. Not sure where you're getting stability idea from.