Subaru BRZ GT300 race car revealed for Japan's Super GT series

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

I don't get how the little engine, even with a turbo, has enough power to push all that aero through the air at a competitive speed on the straight aways.

Originally Posted by Lelandjt

Obviously, that's why I was referring to the huge wing, dive planes, and wide fenders. It takes a lot of horsepower to push that stuff through the air over 130mph. It's gonna be noticable drag above 70mph. Maybe their tracks don't have long straights. Maybe their engines make 600hp, but I would expect much less from a 4cylinder that complies with rules and is made to last longer than a rally cross.

Relatively small-displacement turbos have been kicking the ass of larger-displacement n.a. engines in racing since, well, at least since the turbo revolution in F1 in the late-70s/early-80s. 1400hp in qualifying trim in a 1983 BMW 1.5 liter 4-cylinder F1 engine!

Quick search says Super GT300 power varies from 400 to 550hp.
Yes, aero downforce gives SIGNIFICANT drag on the straights, without it they'd hit MUCH higher speeds. But turning slower laps...

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Marrk

I get all tingly when you talk power-to-weight. That's really my thing. But I would like to know at exactly what speed aero effects kick in. Any aero effects. Every time I see a road car roll by with a whale tail on the back and a splitter on the front, my "poser" alarm goes off.

That’s because they are posing. At least, that’s what I’m doing with things like that.

I owned two MKIV Supras. One was wingless. The stock wing was quoted by Toyota at providing 66lbs of downforce at 90. I could tell a difference, especially at 145. It was a big wing, but it wasn’t a wing, a diffuser, canards, a flat bottom, a rear diffuser, etc that can all really add up. It is all about surface area. Put a mattress on a car or some flat plywood and watch it fly in the air at 35. At 55, an oak armoire/wardrobe the size of a fridge that weighed probably 80-120lbs lifted into the air, flying over the gate of the bed of a truck and smashed to pieces on the highway. It had dressers and other things pressed against it, so only 50-60% of it was exposed to the air, but that is all it took.

Here is a good lesson in physics: surface area... unless that Port-o-pottie is really lighter than those kids.

[wbradley]

Holy shit!

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

That’s because they are posing. At least, that’s what I’m doing with things like that.

I owned two MKIV Supras. One was wingless. The stock wing was quoted by Toyota at providing 66lbs of downforce at 90. I could tell a difference, especially at 145. It was a big wing, but it wasn’t a wing, a diffuser, canards, a flat bottom, a rear diffuser, etc that can all really add up. It is all about surface area. Put a mattress on a car or some flat plywood and watch it fly in the air at 35. At 55, an oak armoire/wardrobe the size of a fridge that weighed probably 80-120lbs lifted into the air, flying over the gate of the bed of a truck and smashed to pieces on the highway. It had dressers and other things pressed against it, so only 50-60% of it was exposed to the air, but that is all it took.

Here is a good lesson in physics: surface area... unless that Port-o-pottie is really lighter than those kids.

I've seen this shitstorm before.

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Here is a good lesson in physics: surface area... unless that Port-o-pottie is really lighter than those kids.

The laws of physics are very strict!

[JesseG]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

That’s because they are posing. At least, that’s what I’m doing with things like that.

I owned two MKIV Supras. One was wingless. The stock wing was quoted by Toyota at providing 66lbs of downforce at 90. I could tell a difference, especially at 145. It was a big wing, but it wasn’t a wing, a diffuser, canards, a flat bottom, a rear diffuser, etc that can all really add up. It is all about surface area. Put a mattress on a car or some flat plywood and watch it fly in the air at 35. At 55, an oak armoire/wardrobe the size of a fridge that weighed probably 80-120lbs lifted into the air, flying over the gate of the bed of a truck and smashed to pieces on the highway. It had dressers and other things pressed against it, so only 50-60% of it was exposed to the air, but that is all it took.

Here is a good lesson in physics: surface area... unless that Port-o-pottie is really lighter than those kids.

The port-a-pottie video is crazy, and kind of hilarious. Imagine someone stepping out of it after flying through the air. “Dude you have to try these new port-a-potties! Their wild mannnn!”
That’s my Denver high dude impression.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by JesseG

The port-a-pottie video is crazy, and kind of hilarious. Imagine someone stepping out of it after flying through the air. “Dude you have to try these new port-a-potties! They're wild mannnn!”
That’s my Denver high dude impression.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally!

I think people need to realize that aero can have a huge effect on performance, and it is all about the surface area, among other things. All these add-ons can really have a profound effect, especially at high speeds.

Consider the effect of a large kite on a windy day. It can be enough to lift a person with tremendous force. In fact, I recall a demonstration in grade school where the presenter used a single sheet of newspaper placed over a yard stick, and he chopped down on the yard stick, and it broke like shown below.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

That’s because they are posing. At least, that’s what I’m doing with things like that.

I owned two MKIV Supras. One was wingless. The stock wing was quoted by Toyota at providing 66lbs of downforce at 90. I could tell a difference, especially at 145. It was a big wing, but it wasn’t a wing, a diffuser, canards, a flat bottom, a rear diffuser, etc that can all really add up. It is all about surface area. Put a mattress on a car or some flat plywood and watch it fly in the air at 35. At 55, an oak armoire/wardrobe the size of a fridge that weighed probably 80-120lbs lifted into the air, flying over the gate of the bed of a truck and smashed to pieces on the highway. It had dressers and other things pressed against it, so only 50-60% of it was exposed to the air, but that is all it took.

Here is a good lesson in physics: surface area... unless that Port-o-pottie is really lighter than those kids.

Minor correction, aero is all about Pressure and Shear which act on surfaces which by definition have area. You can have a lot smaller surface area but higher pressure difference to yield the same force.

Shape also has a lot to do with aero. In the port-o-potty example, the surface area of the children actually may be closer to the surface area of the toilets than you might think (hair, clothes, limbs) but the shape reduces the sum of the pressure vectors. Sails are far more effective at catching wind than the same area of thin strips of fabric.

[beltax90]

went from talking about the new brz to toilets...

not a good look for the recent registry thread i created

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by beltax90

went from talking about the new brz to toilets...

not a good look for the recent registry thread i created

I mean... look at the new BRZ. It kind of makes sense

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Minor correction, aero is all about Pressure and Shear which act on surfaces which by definition have area. You can have a lot smaller surface area but higher pressure difference to yield the same force.

Shape also has a lot to do with aero. In the port-o-potty example, the surface area of the children actually may be closer to the surface area of the toilets than you might think (hair, clothes, limbs) but the shape reduces the sum of the pressure vectors. Sails are far more effective at catching wind than the same area of thin strips of fabric.

Thanks. Yeah, I'm aware. I was trying to keep it simple, which is why I added "among other things" to a later post. There is obviously implied stuff like even if the kid has equal or more surface area like you say, the surfaces aren't all facing in the same direction as the forces, and the surfaces like her hair aren't fixed, so they don't exert much force on her body, nor do they maintain their position or have enough size to prevent air pressure from going around the hair and equalizing.


I was just trying to illustrate for the poster that it doesn't take much speed if there is enough surface area relative to the size of the object. Small planes take off the ground in the 60's, and it doesn't take much for large, fixed, flat objects like roofs/hoods to fly off at low speed. Aero can be effective even at low speeds.

[Sasquachulator]

Originally Posted by beltax90

went from talking about the new brz to toilets...

not a good look for the recent registry thread i created

Well the torque dip kind of looks like a toilet bowl.....
Of course..the FA24 has a much shallower one...so i guess like those squatting toilets in some asian countries?

[beltax90]

more

[beltax90]

,