EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   Aerodynamics (https://ecomodder.com/forum/aerodynamics.html)
-   -   Newbie Question !! Next car opinion? (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/newbie-question-next-car-opinion-1832.html)

chipX 04-13-2008 10:46 AM

Newbie Question !! Next car opinion?
 
Hi !
Firstly id like to introduce myself :) ...
My names Mark and i come from sheffield in the U.K. !!
Curently i do not have a car, however a couple have caught my eye :) I hope to buy one in the next two months.
I am trying to select a car which will be good for long straightline speed only.( constant 70mph u.k. motorway speed limit )
Now this is where i could do with some of your experienced opinions...
The following choices are pretty much "dirty " shapes, however they have small frontal areas , so with a few select tweaks i hope to bring the cd down , and with the multiplication of the frontal area , bring that overall cda very low.
Now...
My first choice :
MKIV Triumph GT6

This is basically a triumph spitfire with a slightly different bonnet , a bigger engine ( irrelevant - the engine will be swapped to a modern smaller unit ) , but a fastback rear end !!
Mayfco.com specify , for the 1980 spitfire to have a cd 0.420 , which isnt great but with the low frontal area of 1.437 makes a nice cda 0.60 .
Going back to the GT6 , i have read , from unofficial sources , that the CD is around 0.38 , giving a total cda 0.431 ..... Better than the opel calibra 8v !!!
I would also be intending on adding an undertray and rear wheel skirts. Perhaps a windshield deflector ( its pretty steep in my eyes the windscreen )
Opinions? can anyone confirm my above figures ??

My second choice.
MG Midget
Now this is another one of my favourite cars , However , it is extremely hard to find any cd or frontal area data on ! ? !
It is a lot lighter ( roughly 3-400 kg) , due to it being the smaller car, smaller engine and probably a lot of other factors !
The mg midgets dimensions are 55"wide x 48.6" tall , 137inch long. ( these are based on a 1972 model , specs from carfolio.com, which im not too sure about trusting. )
I have only been able to find one value for the cd of this car ... 0.49.
Once again, unnoficial data so probably innaccurate. This is where i could do with some help !!!!

Here are some pictures of both cars.
Perhaps you could make some suggestions what could be done to these? ( im not after any boattails or other " extreme " mods !!! ) thanks for reading this post !!!

Triumph GT6
http://i3.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/e7/95/4e5a_12.JPG
http://i3.ebayimg.com/05/i/000/e7/95/4a96_12.JPG
http://i20.ebayimg.com/03/i/000/e7/95/5403_12.JPG


and the Midget
With a soft top, however i would be after the hard top add-on ( easily obtainable - however it is pretty much the same shape, so i dont know whether a custom fastback roof would be a good alternative ? )
http://i4.ebayimg.com/06/i/000/e7/e2/f150_12.JPG
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...ayphotohosting
http://i19.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/e7/e2/ed14_12.JPG


Many thanks all :thumbup: look forwards to your replies !!!

MetroMPG 04-13-2008 11:55 AM

Hi Mark -

I'd say the Triumph is the better choice. It's aerodynamically cleaner to begin with, and probably a better platform for future mods.

The Midget's windshield looks to be nearly flat, which makes it pretty much irrelevant what kind of roof follows, since the flow off the top & sides of the windscreen will be highly turbulent anyway. The trailing wake coming off this car is pretty much going to be the size of the projected frontal area.

As for the Triumph, if I had to guess (always dangerous in aero) I'd say the rear hatch angle is too steep to permit clean flow off the roof & sides all the way to the tail end. But the opportunity is there to add a spoiler to clean things up, along the lines of Ernie Roger's VW New Beetle: http://max-mpg.com/html/tech/main.htm

cheers-
Darin

chipX 04-13-2008 12:21 PM

:D
Thanks for the reply metro :)
I was also thinking of the triumph , as its a bit heavier id imagine it to be a bit more stable on the motorway at higher speeds.
I see about the windscreen, to be honest i hadnt really noticed that much !
May have to consider the spoiler idea, however i wouldnt want to go that large.
Would you of thought the spoiler would have to stretch the total width of the rear or just the rear hatch ?
As you can see also, the wheels are extremely exposed, the rears could probably do with a skirt , to clean up the front id go with "wheel deflectors " , a nice rounded bumper and under tray. i dont think there would be much potential in lowering, but im no expert :)

SVOboy 04-13-2008 07:06 PM

Welcome to the site! I've always had a love for the GT6 (or gt6+ as it was made in the states), so I'd say go for that.

Always nice to have another brit aboard, :)

DifferentPointofView 04-13-2008 08:06 PM

yes it is really hard to say, but I'd definitely have to say the triumph would be the best bet. For separation, I'd say that it'd probably separate somewhere mid-window, a small spoiler for re-attachment would be good, although I wouldn't know. try a water test, although those aren't reliable either :(.

chipX 04-13-2008 08:19 PM

Oooooh, i have found some hard tops for the convertable triumph ( spitfire )
take a look.
version 1
http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/a...HardTop003.jpg


version 2

http://spitfire.amicale.com/images/hardtops/apal.jpg
version 3
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/b...aph2/spit1.jpg
However, chances of finding these tops would be very very slim i would of thought, and secondly , they are to fit the ealier model ( rounder rear end )

Now, the spitfire and gt6 are very similar, the spitfire is more common and cheaper... i wonder if a custom rear end would work out cheap? a shop in the uk willing to make one ?
Im not bothered if i get a spitfire or gt6, i just want the more aero friendly one :)

DifferentPointofView 04-13-2008 08:26 PM

get the spitfire is it's more common and cheaper... if it's more common, you can get more parts, and if it's cheaper, you can get MORE parts cheaper. Use the rest of the money to spend on aero mods and the like. and fixing it up too. :thumbup:

chipX 04-13-2008 08:53 PM

yeah its roughly £1- £1500 cheaper , however , finding an aerodynamic hardtop would possibly offset the cost.
a custom/homemade top may not look pretty :(
thanks for all the replies everyone :)

MetroMPG 04-13-2008 09:02 PM

Wow - that hardtop really does look like a proper aero improvement. I've never seen one quite like that before - thanks for posting it.

Arminius 04-13-2008 10:23 PM

There aren't too many of those cars over here in the US. We can only drool.

aerohead 04-17-2008 02:59 PM

Spitfire/Midget
 
I'll join the :ditch the Midget,go with the Spitfire club,and for the same reasons mentioned.I've got a Spitfire out in my yard that a neighbor has expressed interest in.I'd keep it,however already too many projects on the stove.While a better starting point than the Midget,the Triumph is completely dirty below the beltline,all the way around the car.I'd consider a wrap-around nose,to get air around the car,rather than under it.Go as low as you can without striking driveway ramps and the like.Deep (tall) rocker extensions between the wheels would help attached flow down the flanks.and keep flow from crashing into the spinning tires.An extension behind the rear wheels would help clean flow to wherever you make the end of the car.If the fiberboard radiator duct has survived,that can be integrated into the new nose.Clutch-fan? Flex-fan? Electric fan? Those aftermarket hardtops pictured are beautiful,and way better aero than too-fast factory fastback.Short of new roof,you could simply lengthen the car at boot level with a horizontal spoiler ( no upsweep!).A horizontal wing ( ala Sierra concept/Merkur XR4Ti ) centered on and touching the rear window would help flow re-attachment,entrain a couple vortices,and give more ideal flow over the boot.As far as the bonnet,you might soften the collision of air at the base of the windshield with some form of blister that you could see over.The whole "rake" of the Spitfire pictured seems reversed from what you'd want.The nose should be down,not up,unless it settles when you and a passenger jump in.Some sort of perforated disc wheel covers would help a fraction.Having the petrol filler neck where it is makes for special safety consideration.As far as the Triumph's Cd,I believe there was discussion of that over at maxmpg.You'd have to fish around for the info,.but you might want to check that site.

chipX 04-20-2008 05:40 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Thanks again for the replies.
Have found a piccie of a ex le-mans racer spitfire ( with a gt6 back end - supposedly good enough for racing aero )
Anyways , wanted to show you guys something interesting.
Look mid-way down the bonnet , its got a little deflector ?
Would you of thought this would be for " smoothing " the angle of the air hitting the windshield or what ?
Heres the piccie
Attachment 617

These cars were hitting 134 mph from 109bhp 1.2 litre engines !
Thats probably around 70bhp at the wheels... not bad for 134mph :)

The Toecutter 07-15-2010 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerohead (Post 20172)
Those aftermarket hardtops pictured are beautiful,and way better aero than too-fast factory fastback.

The custom topped Spitfire instead of the factory GT6 would be a better choice, if you can find the top. The hard top would be a rare piece for that Spitfire and you would very likely have to make your own. Likewise, the GT6 rear end could be cleaned up with a fiberglass Kamm extension, and that would require less time than a fiberglass custom top and trunk to accomodate the Spitfire. The Spitfire MkIV/1500 DOES have an unearodynamic hard top that is more commonly available, and that has perfect potential for being modified to clean the aero as well.

The GT6 MkIII is probably more aero than the earlier versions of the GT6; Reverend Gadget used this body for a Spitfire conversion and it only needs 100 Wh/mile, both around town and steady 60 mph, using a relatively inefficient 6.7" ADC motor. The car is an extremely light conversion with LRR tires, definately less than 2,000 lbs.

The norm for Spit conversions, as long as they're using quality components and not scavenged forklift specials, is about 150-200 Wh/mile around town/60 mph, and that's without the efficiency tricks implemented by Gadget.

If you can find either a Spit or GT6, they're both excellent candidates for an aerodynamically efficient body with some work. You'll simply have to take different approaches to cleaning up the aero depending on which one you have chosen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipX (Post 20698)
Thanks again for the replies.
Have found a piccie of a ex le-mans racer spitfire ( with a gt6 back end - supposedly good enough for racing aero )
Anyways , wanted to show you guys something interesting.
Look mid-way down the bonnet , its got a little deflector ?
Would you of thought this would be for " smoothing " the angle of the air hitting the windshield or what ?

These cars were hitting 134 mph from 109bhp 1.2 litre engines !
Thats probably around 70bhp at the wheels... not bad for 134mph :)

Ahh, the ADU4B, otherwise known as a GT4. It probably has more closer to 80 hp at the wheels counting brake drag, wheel bearings, and other small losses on top of the tranny/diff/joints; the manual transmission of the GT6 plus driveline are about 80% efficient combined, which isn't very good for a manual. Their loads are extremely low, as they have no power-anything except lights, dashboard, and radio. We will assume lights and radio are off(the ADU4B probably lacked the latter).

With 80 hp at the wheels assumed(brake drag, wheel bearings, transmission/driveline losses from 109 bhp), and assuming a mass of 730 kg, with old style bias ply tires with a Crr of 0.015, the CdA works out to 0.444 m^2 if 1.25 kg/m^3 is the air density.

This is also a CdA of 4.78 sq ft. If we assume a frontal area of 14.9 sq ft(GT6 had this), this is a Cd of 0.32.

This ADU4B would have a better CdA than a Honda Insight, and is a perfect candidate for a long range EV or fuel efficient and lightening fast hyper-miler compatible biodiesel rocket(I'd love an OM606 Mercedes diesel with bigger turbo and Myna tuned injector pump in an aeromodded Spit running grease someday... drool... but its internals would need upgrading to be suitable for the torque; heavier 2400 lb 240Zs tuned like this do 12s in the 1/4, imagine a sub 2000 lbs Spit tuned like this with appropriate gearing to reach 180 mph @ 5100 rpm, with that kind of body on not just think of the acceleration, but also fuel economy it would get if driven conservatively; you'd have a 60 mpg hwy car that could rip off 11s!).

I've once heard a Cd of the GT6 claimed as a 0.32 from a racer I spoke to years ago; maybe he was getting it confused with the ADU1B/ADU4B cars, as they are commonly mistaken as precursors to the GT6, and any Spit/GT6 does need lots of cleaning up around the bottom with regard to airflow. The Spitfire Mk I-III was quoted as 0.39 in a book titled "Streamlining and Car Aerodynamics" by Jan P. Norbye, and the MkIV/1500 Spitfire is quoted as a 0.42 on various internet sources.

There ARE fiberglass body kits for Spitfires/GT6s that are replicas of the racing body displayed in the above post. Click the link below:

Specs & Prices

There is another company that sells a front air dam for both spit and GT6 and a giant rear wing for the GT6(think Plymouth Superbird.

All of the products mentioned are expensive. If you're not rich enough to afford them, you're better off doing your own aeromods. They will be similar in effectiveness to the kit listed above(the kit is comparible to the ADU4B); in fact, a custom setup with attention exclusively to aero would probably do much better, although you may not have the weight reduction that could be provided by the above kit. There are some Spitfire/GT6 enthusiasts that have modified the stock hood to look exactly like the LeMans bonnet on the GT4 racers.

The GT6 would be less work than the others for diy modification, but it would not lend itself as much options as the Spitfire would give; the only effective path for cleaning up the aero for the GT6 without cutting off the roof is the Kamm style and deleting the rain gutters and applying fiberglass where necessary to re-shape the roof, but the spitfire would allow one to be creative due to it having no roof.

Regardless of which year/model of Spit/GT6 you buy, you can make them extremely good with aero, even the ones with ugly rubber front bumpers, and even on the cheap, if you're willing to put in the work.

some_other_dave 07-15-2010 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipX (Post 20698)
Look mid-way down the bonnet , its got a little deflector ?
Would you of thought this would be for " smoothing " the angle of the air hitting the windshield or what ?

If there are openings in the bonnet aft of the clear deflector there, then I would say it is for creating a low-pressure pocket to extract hot air from inside the engine bay.

If there are no openings that would be candidates for that, then it could be a way to keep (some of the) rain off of the windshield when driving at speed. There's something in my head that says it would not be for cleaning up the aero over the car, but I don't have any specific reasons why. Just a feeling.

-soD

The Toecutter 09-28-2010 04:11 PM

I just got a reply from one of the folks at Jigsaw racing.

138 mph in the Mulsanne straight on only 111 bhp! :eek:

This thing would make the perfect EV conversion...

HHOTDI 01-24-2011 11:16 PM

LOL, my Dad used to have an old Bug Eye Sprite years ago and loved it! At 6'4", I have no Idea how he was able to drive it... :{)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:18 AM.

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