Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-08-2016, 01:56 PM   #1 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 5,005

ND Miata - '15 Mazda MX-5 Special Package
90 day: 42.54 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,866
Thanked 2,501 Times in 1,547 Posts
Belly pan + air dam

Recently I was considering - is there any point to installing both an air dam and a belly pan? The pan reduces turbulence, whereas the dam reduces the amount of air moving through the turbulent area. If the underside is already relatively clean, would a dam just add frontal area, or might there still be benefits?

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-08-2016, 02:10 PM   #2 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 4,150

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,784
Thanked 1,922 Times in 1,246 Posts
Frontal area is up to you, but smoothing out the nose can't hurt.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2016, 02:32 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 5,005

ND Miata - '15 Mazda MX-5 Special Package
90 day: 42.54 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,866
Thanked 2,501 Times in 1,547 Posts
I'm almost certainly going to go with an air dam on the HCH, but my Insight is already pretty clean underneath:






So, to air dam or not? Will I likely see gains, or will the extra frontal area just hurt me?
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ecky For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-19-2016), BamZipPow (04-11-2016), UltArc (04-19-2016)
Old 04-08-2016, 04:17 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,561
Thanks: 7,736
Thanked 8,554 Times in 7,041 Posts
I'm purely guesstimating here; but if the air dam is no lower than 95% of the pan, then no harm done. It there is a diverter to manage the stagnation point and/or ducting for front wheelwell air curtains, bonus points.

You may find that Aerocivic-style sidewall air dams and spats might be more beneficial.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2016, 07:25 AM   #5 (permalink)
Not Doug
 
Xist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,186

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 35.35 mpg (US)

Mid-Life Crisis Fighter - '99 Honda Accord LX
90 day: 34.2 mpg (US)

Gramps - '04 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 35.39 mpg (US)

Don't hit me bro - '05 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 35.79 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7,217
Thanked 2,217 Times in 1,708 Posts
I always planned on using an air dam as an attachment point for the belly pan, but it looks like you have that covered.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2016, 12:33 AM   #6 (permalink)
is not covered in bees.
 
Istas's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seeley Lake, Montana, USA
Posts: 207

Honda - '05 Honda Accord EX
90 day: 27.16 mpg (US)

Insight - '00 Honda Insight w A/C
90 day: 66.55 mpg (US)
Thanks: 53
Thanked 51 Times in 26 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Istas
This looks like it might be a case of "can't tell without A-B-A-B testing" since the underside is already so smooth.

I don't have numbers to back it up, but I've always been under the impression that having an airdam with the bottom edge level with the lowest point on your undertray (i.e., no lower than any point on the non-suspension parts of the car) is best, and to keep the tray level from there back to at least the rear wheels. Seems to me like having it level in front would be better than wedging more air under the car. And I think I recall hearing that it's better to have the stagnation point on the front of the car lower than higher, and the airdam would lower the stagnation point.

But I don't know. I too am not eager to duplicate work just to test.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Istas For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-19-2016)
Old 04-19-2016, 08:01 AM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aardvarcus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Evensville, TN
Posts: 676

Deep Blue - '94 GMC Suburban K2500 SLE
90 day: 23.75 mpg (US)

Griffin (T4R) - '99 Toyota 4Runner SR5
90 day: 25.43 mpg (US)
Thanks: 237
Thanked 580 Times in 322 Posts
From looking at what you have already done with the belly pan I doubt you will see a reduction of cD*A from adding an air dam, however you could experience other benefits such as reduced lift in either the front or back, depending on where you positioned the air dam.

I would also consider doing an air dam style flexible tire spat in front of your front tires at about a thirty degree angle towards the inside. You have probably more to gain keeping the wind off your high cD tire than your relatively smooth underbelly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2016, 09:02 AM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 5,005

ND Miata - '15 Mazda MX-5 Special Package
90 day: 42.54 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,866
Thanked 2,501 Times in 1,547 Posts
From the factory, the car already has small deflectors on the front. One of mine was missing, so I made something out of coroplast, but it's missing again after the accident. Any pictures showing what the optimal solution would be?



  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2016, 12:59 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,561
Thanks: 7,736
Thanked 8,554 Times in 7,041 Posts


Yours looks right to me; just make it out of angle stock and conveyor belt material. I suggest the two U-shaped pieces fastened along their longer edges but with the forward edge open so the whole can flex more on impacts.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to freebeard For This Useful Post:
Ecky (04-19-2016)
Old 04-19-2016, 03:16 PM   #10 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aardvarcus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Evensville, TN
Posts: 676

Deep Blue - '94 GMC Suburban K2500 SLE
90 day: 23.75 mpg (US)

Griffin (T4R) - '99 Toyota 4Runner SR5
90 day: 25.43 mpg (US)
Thanks: 237
Thanked 580 Times in 322 Posts
I agree with freebeard, the optimal solution is the one that survives road use. There are some good pictures and discussion on an older thread I made on this topic that I will link below.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ngs-32068.html

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aardvarcus For This Useful Post:
Ecky (04-19-2016)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com