Review: Beatrush Under-Panel
Aug 21, 2007, 07:06 PM
#2
In the article you said:
The under-panel is lightweight, features more aerodynamic efficiency, and promotes more down-force than the stock unit.
What's this based on? I'll believe this was proven somewhere but statements like these from companies tout such benefits yet don't usually provide the scientific testing proving them.
The under-panel is lightweight, features more aerodynamic efficiency, and promotes more down-force than the stock unit.
What's this based on? I'll believe this was proven somewhere but statements like these from companies tout such benefits yet don't usually provide the scientific testing proving them.
Aug 22, 2007, 07:03 AM
#3
It is a more aero dynamic design than the stock piece featuring channels and vents to promote these effects. Our results our based on our impressions as we do not yet have the data logging equipment to measure this (although we will). I will have Kami Speed chime in with the background from beatrush.
The channels and plates you see protruding down from the underside of the panel are normal aero features to promote better under car flow. The flaps in front of the tires are a commonly used device to increase high speed front end stability.
As far as weight, it is heavier than the stock plastic, but by very little. It is a thin and light piece of aluminum which is required for a rigid platform to mount the channels and flaps vs plastic.
The channels and plates you see protruding down from the underside of the panel are normal aero features to promote better under car flow. The flaps in front of the tires are a commonly used device to increase high speed front end stability.
As far as weight, it is heavier than the stock plastic, but by very little. It is a thin and light piece of aluminum which is required for a rigid platform to mount the channels and flaps vs plastic.
Aug 22, 2007, 11:39 AM
#7
It is a more aero dynamic design than the stock piece featuring channels and vents to promote these effects. Our results our based on our impressions as we do not yet have the data logging equipment to measure this (although we will). I will have Kami Speed chime in with the background from beatrush.
The channels and plates you see protruding down from the underside of the panel are normal aero features to promote better under car flow. The flaps in front of the tires are a commonly used device to increase high speed front end stability.
As far as weight, it is heavier than the stock plastic, but by very little. It is a thin and light piece of aluminum which is required for a rigid platform to mount the channels and flaps vs plastic.
The channels and plates you see protruding down from the underside of the panel are normal aero features to promote better under car flow. The flaps in front of the tires are a commonly used device to increase high speed front end stability.
As far as weight, it is heavier than the stock plastic, but by very little. It is a thin and light piece of aluminum which is required for a rigid platform to mount the channels and flaps vs plastic.
Weren't your results based on a comparison with the panel and with no panel at all? I know you went based on your feel as well as track results and found benefits to having this panel vs. none at all, but it would've been a much better comparison to have done it with the stock panel and with the beatrush, seeing as we all get a stock one with the car. It's like taking the brakes of my car then comparing to driving with 6-piston Alcon calipers/13.5" rotors and saying the latter is a huge improvement over the stock system despite never testing the stock brakes.
While the grooves and flaps you speak may be intended for the purposes you describe, the stock piece has various grooves and shapes + those flaps as well so again I ask how is this particular design an improvement? These sound more like goals but not proof they accomplished them. I can put a 5" wide triangle in the middle of my rear wing saying it's an aero feature and I put it there to increase downforce, but does it really? Just playing devil's advocate. I see lots of "aero" parts purporting to add benefits but without the proof. Aerodynamics is hardly common sense. Just look at the vortex generator.
Trending Topics
Aug 22, 2007, 12:36 PM
#8
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: CA & MD
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at it I'm hard pressed to take your word for it that it's a "more aero dynamic design" than the stock piece. Why is it more aero dynamic? You're losing the skirt, the brake channels, and the general shape of the stock piece. Why is this design better?
Weren't your results based on a comparison with the panel and with no panel at all? I know you went based on your feel as well as track results and found benefits to having this panel vs. none at all, but it would've been a much better comparison to have done it with the stock panel and with the beatrush, seeing as we all get a stock one with the car. It's like taking the brakes of my car then comparing to driving with 6-piston Alcon calipers/13.5" rotors and saying the latter is a huge improvement over the stock system despite never testing the stock brakes.
While the grooves and flaps you speak may be intended for the purposes you describe, the stock piece has various grooves and shapes + those flaps as well so again I ask how is this particular design an improvement? These sound more like goals but not proof they accomplished them. I can put a 5" wide triangle in the middle of my rear wing saying it's an aero feature and I put it there to increase downforce, but does it really? Just playing devil's advocate. I see lots of "aero" parts purporting to add benefits but without the proof. Aerodynamics is hardly common sense. Just look at the vortex generator.
Weren't your results based on a comparison with the panel and with no panel at all? I know you went based on your feel as well as track results and found benefits to having this panel vs. none at all, but it would've been a much better comparison to have done it with the stock panel and with the beatrush, seeing as we all get a stock one with the car. It's like taking the brakes of my car then comparing to driving with 6-piston Alcon calipers/13.5" rotors and saying the latter is a huge improvement over the stock system despite never testing the stock brakes.
While the grooves and flaps you speak may be intended for the purposes you describe, the stock piece has various grooves and shapes + those flaps as well so again I ask how is this particular design an improvement? These sound more like goals but not proof they accomplished them. I can put a 5" wide triangle in the middle of my rear wing saying it's an aero feature and I put it there to increase downforce, but does it really? Just playing devil's advocate. I see lots of "aero" parts purporting to add benefits but without the proof. Aerodynamics is hardly common sense. Just look at the vortex generator.
I've driven the car on all three scenarios (the stock piece on, no panel, and beatrush panel). The differences between the stock panel and the beatrush panel are seen at higher speeds. For example with the stock piece you could feel the noise lift, but it wasn't as bad as not having a panel at all. With the beatrush panel it seemed to cure the lift issue and gave me more confidence to take the car at higher speeds then we normally take it. Now it didn't completely cure the issue, but it did help. It just gave us more room to go slightly faster then before. Without adding a front splitter or changing anything else aerodynamically except for the undertray, we came to the conclusion that the beatrush panel did make a change for the better. Again this isn't based on actual #'s, but more based on driving impressions on track.
The simple fact is everything aerodynamically is based on trial and error. My personal opinion is that not every aero piece will work for everyone and produce the same results across the board. If that were the case then everyone would be buying the exact same thing and no one in Time Attack would be experimenting with different wings, etc. There are so many factors involved in order to achieve aerodynamic efficiency. With that being said, when we tested this product we weren't expecting much from just an undertray. The simple truth was by just changing the tray itself we saw more speed on the straights. That in itself proved to us that the beatrush undertray helped improve the car's behavior.
Now we are not telling you that the stock piece is useless and should be immediately changed. What we are saying is if you are experiencing similar issues to what we were going through (with the stock panel and/or no panel), then this item may be an easy solution to help cure the problem. It helped us so it may help you.
Last edited by spt; Aug 22, 2007 at 12:42 PM.
Aug 22, 2007, 01:24 PM
#10
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: CA & MD
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is why we have open discussions linked to all of our articles. Whenever you write a review it's really one sided and sometimes you miss things that others can bring up.
Aug 22, 2007, 01:36 PM
#11
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what is the install like? does it use the stock points? or do you have to drill out new ones?
and does it new bolts/screws now or does it use plastic tabs like stock.
thanks
and does it new bolts/screws now or does it use plastic tabs like stock.
thanks
Aug 22, 2007, 01:44 PM
#12
The one test I would like to see, would be between the Carbing and the Beatrush. As mush as I like the Beatrush, I can get a Carbing for almost half price. The question is, will the price difference be worth it or is the Carbing doing what it was designed to, but maybe not as well, thus the difference in price.
Aug 22, 2007, 01:45 PM
#13
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: CA & MD
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It uses stock points to bolt in. Also the directions show to use a combination of the supplied hardware and stock hardware (plastic clips, etc), but we bought our own hardware to replace the stock pieces (primarily the stock front pieces that secure the panel to the front bumper) from a hardware store. The reason why we did that is to make sure everything stays together just in case something hits it.
Aug 22, 2007, 05:13 PM
#14
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aug 22, 2007, 05:32 PM
#15
so there is no major different between the beatrush and the carbing I take it?
I will have to cut either one for the wastegate and I will be trimming the back section to make oil changes painless without removing the piece to get to the filter..
So with these things in mind, and the price difference, I would assume the carbing would be the best buy
I will have to cut either one for the wastegate and I will be trimming the back section to make oil changes painless without removing the piece to get to the filter..
So with these things in mind, and the price difference, I would assume the carbing would be the best buy
Last edited by kmcconn9; Aug 22, 2007 at 07:16 PM.