Good summary! All the things I have been preaching about. And have tried
to incorporate into my car. Wait until you seen the paint job and the
roughness of it. No big tricks to reduce o the tiniest imperfection. ANd
I do not (yet) have a rear spoiler. We'll see..
Oh, Keith, I did get the comments.
mayf, out in Pahrump
mayf
Keith Turk wrote:
>Maybe there are some newer folks that haven't seen some of this...
>
>Eakers first rule he gave me.... LOWER IS BETTER... almost virtually Always.
>
>Rear spoilers suck HP ... you only need downforce if your last name is
>FORCE... or your doing stupid things like we are... and then you only need
>enough... but NO more then just enough... last year at 260mph I had 415lbs of
>rear downforce and 350 on the nose... for a total increase of 765lbs...
>However I found that the nose was caused by shock travel and not wind.. (
>rebound was stiffer then compression )
>
>Front spoilers often clean up a car... front air dams are kick ass at keeping
>air from the bottom of a dirty car.
>
>The attitude of a car effects the total frontal area of a car... minimize the
>profile to the wind... make it as small as possible.
>
>Wax doesn't do a dang thing... Gary was vehement about this... it honestly
>doesn't do JACK... he's tested it way to many times and can't read that far on
>the right side of the decimal point.
>
>If your curious, all that CD thing means... is this.... you have three major
>concerns out on the salt... Traction, HP and Drag... with any given amount of
>traction you can use the Hp available to overcome drag until the hp exceeds
>the available traction.. the less drag you have the faster you can go before
>the wheels start to spin.
>
>The easiest way to increase drag is to add weight to the car... which
>increases the downforce on the tires... but then you have to worry about
>balance and taking more Mass from point A to point B... with 5 miles to play
>with, Mass isn't always a killer... but it's never good in the event of an
>incident. ( E will always equal MC squared )or the energy associated with an
>incident is directly proportional to the amount of Mass and velocity it's
>traveling...
>
>Okay hmmm there has to be more but my brain is tired of trying to figure out
>how to spell... LOL
>
>Keith
|