Downforce, CoD, Speed.... the wing
Might answer the "what if", but does not address the "why". To some, the latter might actually be a more interesting concept... leading to further innovation.
Last edited by Zeus; Jan 16, 2008 at 12:14 PM.
i would say the wingless ,just because you will save weight thats all. VG is there to create vortex for the wing, so the wing can be more effective. More air mass will pass thru the same amount of time. Bright idea. So without the wing. the VG. will do the same thing ,like the eye glass without a glass...
Looks cool but does nothing.
Looks cool but does nothing.
This is like a 2 yr old thread but anyways... The only downside I see to taking off the wing is stability. If you test without the wing and don't experience any stability issues, then by all means, take it off. It's just adding weight and drag that are not needed in a drag race.
As for the vortex generator, the paper that someone linked says that the vortex generators reduce the drag by 0.006 coefficient, so about 1.5% (assuming the drag for the evo is 0.38).
As for the vortex generator, the paper that someone linked says that the vortex generators reduce the drag by 0.006 coefficient, so about 1.5% (assuming the drag for the evo is 0.38).
Here's a quote from wiki. A simple look into the concept of drag and our cars from the standpoint of just the car and drag.
"Note that the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7.5 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Exerting four times the force over a fixed distance produces four times as much work. At twice the speed the work (resulting in displacement over a fixed distance) is done twice as fast. Since power is the rate of doing work, four times the work done in half the time requires eight times the power."
Basically the correlation of drag and distance are mentioned as twice the speed of the car is equivalent to four times the drag placed on the car. Correct me if I'm wrong, please do so, but my assumption according to the excerpt is that over a fixed distance x we need to apply 2x the work to get there in half the time.
I'm hungry, I'll come back later after I'm done when things and continue on into details as much as I can.
"Note that the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. A car cruising on a highway at 50 mph (80 km/h) may require only 10 horsepower (7.5 kW) to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100 mph (160 km/h) requires 80 hp (60 kW). With a doubling of speed the drag (force) quadruples per the formula. Exerting four times the force over a fixed distance produces four times as much work. At twice the speed the work (resulting in displacement over a fixed distance) is done twice as fast. Since power is the rate of doing work, four times the work done in half the time requires eight times the power."
Basically the correlation of drag and distance are mentioned as twice the speed of the car is equivalent to four times the drag placed on the car. Correct me if I'm wrong, please do so, but my assumption according to the excerpt is that over a fixed distance x we need to apply 2x the work to get there in half the time.
I'm hungry, I'll come back later after I'm done when things and continue on into details as much as I can.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
InjectedPerformance
EvoX 'For Sale' Exterior Styling
15
May 18, 2010 03:44 PM









