It would not matter because the point of failure will be at mounting points. The force is concentrated downwards (vertically) on those point. Connecting to the cage only makes a difference if that connection allows the force to be channeled in such a way that the cage consumes that force. E.g have the front and rear scafolding on both sides go directly through the trunk of the car and connect directly to the cage as opposed to ending them and doing a horizontal connection.

Now yes it could be a very exotic very strong component whereby if the car is driven at average race speeds sub 150mph it doesn't matter but it just seems to be one of several things on this build that first glance seem really cool but under more scrutiny seem kinda odd. That being said it will be interesting to see more details on the build.

 

I am suprised the exhaust does not exit the side to optimize the diffuser performance. We had to side exit it because our flat bottom design caused the fuel tank to heat. We need a picture of the bottom of that car to understand what their up to...I don't inderstand why a turbo race car needs a muffler?

 

The diffuser should be functioning below where the radiator is placed. If they are trying to use airflow out of the diffuser to go through the radiator, they'd kill downforce, because you want high velocity below the vehicle. Anything impeding it would hurt performance.

It's all dependent on how they are managing airflow, but taking flow away from the diffuser isn't the best solution in my opinion.

Dan

 

I don't think there is much to gain with a rear mounted radiators unless its a rally car (in case you hit debris or something.)

 

^Why do you say that? Especially on a nose heavy car like ours I'd think replacing the 20 or so lbs off the front and putting it on the rear would be ideal.

 

Weight distribution...

Granted, the ones I have seen on the rear use fans and locate the radiator in the trunk area.

 

Photos of that car were definitely taken at the KW Suspension's Shaker Rig Facility in Germany.

 

think of how much extra weight you are re-adding to the car to put the radiator in the rear. there is MUCH more significant weight that could be moves(removed).

 

Bahhh such a gorgeous build... I need info but the radiator in the rear... I say nay.

 

How much weight do you think aluminum tubes might ad?

Dan

 

I'm likely going this route on my car later this year. I figured that the extra water would be responsible for more weight than the tubes. If my internet math is correct:

• 1.25" tubes
• 10' minimum run each direction (just a guess, probably a little bit more?)
• 424 cu/in of water in the pipes
• 231 cu/in in a gallon
• water weights ~8.3 lbs per gallon
• ~15 lbs more water than stock system

Dave

 

yes the additional coolant is probably going to outweigh the tubing.
so say you add 25lbs. not very significant, but then again, how significant is moving the radiator to the rear to begin with?

does this also put more drag on the water pump now that its pushing water 3X the length?

I still don't see an advantage to doing this. but maybe I'm wrong.

 

From what I've heard, the OE waterpump is fine with the extra length.

Sometimes is packaging that causes the need for the swap. Space is pretty tight in front of the motor, and at Pikes Peak you need all the cooling you can get. Moving the radiator to the rear should allow the intercooler to get better air flow out of the core, and now I can put an even larger radiator back in the trunk area. In my car, I'm planning on having it sit under the speaker shelf, so not as far back as the car in this thread.

Dave

 

I thought it would be cool to put the radiator in the rear and some very large "sucker" fans that draw from the underbody of the car. I like making dual purpose modifications. but this isn't legal in most organizations.

 

Or you can get a Meziere electric water pump, and remove the strain on the engine with the factory pump, and gain 3x the power.
Kill 2 birds.