View Single Post
Old 04-10-2008, 11:03 PM   #36 (permalink)
diesel_john's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 595
Thanks: 5
Thanked 19 Times in 14 Posts
Send a message via MSN to diesel_john
I was thinking something similar, aka only lower the front end. Are you thinking that the "larger volume" open space at the rear would aid in air exiting faster at the rear? CarloSW2[/QUOTE]

good point. cfg83,
But, i didn't think of that until i started thinking about a smooth underbody.
I found lowering the back end increased the drag (with a stock underbody), so would raising the back end decrease drag (with a smooth underbody). So now that i have smooth under, I will try to raise the back.

Probably each car should be optimized for front to rear height.
We say the shape of the rear is more important, so does that mean I can raise the rear ?to enhance the tail and while blunting the windshield, and still reduce drag, inexpensively.
Angle of attack effects so many things.
the grill to hood flow
hood to windshield flow
windshield to roof flow
roof to rear deck flow
on the bottom lift or downforce
under flow exit

lowering the front would compromise my alignment.

aerohead, thanks for the explanation. It gave me the answer to my question. What is optimal?
""A symmetrical airfoil of 6-to-1 aspect ratio,cut in half lengthwise,would describe the lowest drag car body""

Last edited by diesel_john; 04-13-2008 at 01:58 AM..
  Reply With Quote