Stupid Idea 5336 and counting....

[chuckm]

lunarhighway's idea would work very well. It would be a bit expensive...
Stepper Drive
Motors and Cables
PLC counter for the VSS
DC powered PLC
The control method would have to be set up in speed domain ranges. The motors would be in one position up to, say, 35 mph, and then lowered for up to 55mph, and lowest above that.
I think the PLC counter would work for the VSS input.
Oh, and depending on the how many pulses/sec the VSS might send, a lower end PLC (D0-05DD-D) could be used and the counter might be eliminated.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

Along the lines of the RV dirt skirts, I too was thinking about using those as side skirts and perhaps as a front air dam for the last 2" of ground clearance. Now would there be much loss from friction if they drag along the ground?

What about rubber matting?

On the highway, I pass several tractor-trailer rigs that have long-haul sleepers and energy absorbing cabs. Many of these have a rubber flap/strip that runs the length between the door and the end of the cab (between the cab unit and chassis) on the upper side. I wish I had a pic...

It's designed to block airflow into that space and allow the cab unit to move up-and-down to absorb energy beyond the suspension (and then to the articulating seat) to cushion the driver / co-driver from harsh road conditions...

Anyhoo folks, take a look at this strip -- it's almost like a "Welcome Mat" in thickness and bendability. I believe some Pruis owners cover grilles with it. Could this material act as a flexible air-block to improve aero in this area???

RH77

[kane66]

not to divert or subvert, but wouldn't it be easier to bag the car and just have it set up to raise or lower base on speed... i.e. stock height >35 mpg, low rider height < 35 mph. Just a thought.

[cfg83]

kane66 -

Originally Posted by kane66

not to divert or subvert, but wouldn't it be easier to bag the car and just have it set up to raise or lower base on speed... i.e. stock height >35 mpg, low rider height < 35 mph. Just a thought.

Easier yes, but isn't it way more expensive to have air shocks?

I think justpassntime's goal was to have a cheap *passive* system. Some low cost coroplast or other plastic material + some strategically mounted springs and wa-la. The motorized systems are definitely better, but that means they're also prone to break.

CarloSW2