SuperCuda 208 MPH
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1cLf...ure=watch-vrec

This video shows how imprtant that good aerodynamics can be when going over 200 MPH.
The SuperCuda needed over 1000 horsepower to go 200 MPH, and this was after they finally blocked most of the grille because the hood was lifting at speed.
The trim piece on the side of the windshield also blew off.

208
 

Thanks Cd!
I was looking at the HOT ROD Magazine,1980 Camaro you posted an image of awhile back.
That car,at Bonneville,with a Pro Stock hoodscoop and 925-950 horsepower,did 255 mph on loose salt.
261.602 mph on "better salt."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The car had:
* 100% grille-block
*nose dropped into the weeds
*MOONs
*extended rear spoiler with up-kick angle of 19-degrees
*Backlight-to-trailing edge of spoiler angle of 15-degrees
*35 F ice-water-cooled inter-cooler intake manifold
*4,190 lb race weight
*Length/height = 4.05
*effective 'Template' of 48% aft-body
*BSFC 0.53-0.56 pounds/hp-hr
*Approx. 3.11 mpg @ 260 mph
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of the 'Super Cuda' with 'Blowfish,' at Cd 0.20.:)

Hmmm, I'd like to see the SuperCuda compared to a 1969 Charger Daytona, or maybe one of these. HPPcars.com .::.

Neat video.

At 208MPH: "It wasn't running out of horsepower, but it was running out of aero. And I was running out of cojones". Quite understandable.

Perhaps a Daytona nose cone?

Daytona nose indeed!

How about this one:
http://www.radrides.com/images/macga...6kXS288568.JPG
George Poteet's '69 Cuda built by Rad Rides by Troy.

Esentially the same car, just a lot more focus on aerodynamics. With it's first motor (a turbo 4 cylinder making about 1000hp) it set a record at 255+mph. Same horsepower as the SuperCuda, but a LOT more speed.

Poteet's car is a 69 as you said, which shares zero body panels with the Cuda that LMC built. The 69 is a fastback body which I think is actually pretty good in the shape department.
Travis..

...correct, the two bodys are totally different:

1969 is an A-body fastback.

1970 is an E-body notchback sedan.

When he said ' the hood lifted 3" ' did he mean at the center of the hood from the preesure build up or the front edge???


(either would scare the living crap out of me!!)

...I'd guess that he was referring to the center of the hood (which is all fiberglass) because the front iof the hood is secured down by a pair of racing-style "locked" pins:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...dScfsTcGWiwAfg

...and you can see the typical "bowing" that occurred on almost every AAR 'Cuda hood.

While totally different, there wasn't that much design change related to aerodynamics in those years. I'd bet the CdA is only slightly different between the two cars in stock form.

I'd say the Blowfish vs SuperCuda is a fairly good comparison of how aerodynamics affects speed on similar cars with similar power...

Of course, it's also worth noting that the SuperCuda has been modified aerodynamically as well. It's been lowered and has a belly pan, splitter, and rear diffuser.

The 1969 A-body was narrower/taller and the 1970 E-body was wider/lower because it was specifically designed to accept the low & raised B-block engines 383, 440 and HEMI, which the A-body was NEVER (originally) intended to handle:

• 1969 A-body: 54.5"(h) x 70.0"(w), 108" wheelbase.
• 1970 E-body: 50.9"(h) x 74.9"(w), 108" wheelbase.

...although B-blocks were 'shoe-horned' into A-bodies by both owners and Corporate Plymouth.

Here's a quick look at the two. The first is the same as the LMC car, and the second is like Poteet's car. I would go out on a limb and say that the 69 has much better aero than the 70, even in stock form.
Travis..

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z...ps1f45e9d4.jpg

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z...pse4f2223f.jpg