| I had no problem with your response thats why I responded to yours. I was actually referring to other treads about the same part and didn't think it was necessary to address all the little useless comments per author. Sorry I did not make that clear. I just figured you guys would know who I was referring to. They were mainly about my wheels, and tire stretch and other unproductive remarks, only those with too much time on their hands seem to post. Again about the Double element, here are the specifics of the design detail. As you channel the air underneath the chassis and block out areas causing turbulence the air will increase its speed and move with greater velocity lowering the underbelly turbulence creating a lower pressure zone , Hence "increased down force". Now to achieve this there are a couple ways to attack it. One, (and this is what you are speaking of and I believe a few others posted about this) is to drop the fins very close to the ground. Problem is, you end up with 10" drops and it looks ugly. I played with a few designs and nothing IMO looked visually appealing. The plate design was created years ago when I was doing some testing at Willow springs and it works. It is not yet fine tuned on this chassis, but it does function and again is an improvement in down force. A few people have questioned the angle that it sits at being more of an air brake and slowing down your overall speed. Well this is where its main function comes in. The unit is fairly tunable and desired angle would reflect on,
a) the desired amount of traction and down force necessary for the particular application. For example, a TT Z32 with a few extra pounds in the rear will not need as much down force to keep traction in the rear...but an NA like the Simtec Z is so light in the rear that some extra down force is necessary (unfortunately it does use up some hp, but thats why you need to tune the unit for your application and get the right balance between speed and handling). Depending on the track i am running at, I would tune the angle to fit my needs as far as high speed stability vs. short course with lower speeds.
b) Also, You can't judge the angle of an aero part underneath a chassis vs. a wing sitting on top. The degree of the angle, may look a bit extreme, but you need to consider that the bottom of the chassis is not getting anywhere near the amount of air mass as the top of the car. Otherwise you would get airborne. Also it would defeat the whole purpose of our front airdam cutting the air out from under that chassis in the first place. The focus of this diffuser is to take a majority of the remaining air underneath and keeping it from getting turbulent by getting lost up in the rear portion of the car. It is designed to use the remaining air traveling underneath the chassis and channeling it up through the several sections helping exit the vehicles undercarriage with as much velocity as possible. Again, I believe this design can be improved upon ...IF you are willing to cut out your spare tire tub and do a few more modifications that would require considerable fabrication. Since most are NOT willing to hack up their Z's (Milo not included) I need to make something that the majority will be willing to bolt on. Its the same routine Nissan went through when designing the Z32 in the first place. The engineers designing the engine, chassis, suspension, cabin, interior etc. all had to make little compromises to make the car into what it is. Plus all that needed to meet the requirements of a budget. Designing anything this large in perspective takes a lot of thought, and as mentioned before a lot of endless hours. By the way I picked up on your "subtle" ending sentence. Just wanted to make sure you know i picked up on it...haha
I didn't say hug your local "visionary", just some positive feedback... and like I said, that wasn't aimed towards your post. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time to respond to every post. Craig
|
16:53:35 03/19/11
