Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Mike Kamm
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2004
Location: Averill Park, NY
Posts: 5583
Karma: 18 (+19/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
quote:
toga94m wrote:
Any rules about adding solid rocket boosters? They don't deplete the gas tank.
Don't give me any ideas Tom! 
I was thinking of trying some inverted vortex generators attached to the bottom of the rear axle to help the flow attachment past the rear bumper. 
|
|
6/10/2009, 9:54 pm
|
Send Email to Mike Kamm
Send PM to Mike Kamm
|
itjstagame
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 11-2006
Location: Troy, NY
Posts: 60
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
Yeah aerodynamics is key, it'd be awesome to have a ton of sheet metal and access to a windtunnel.
As for the date, I'd vote for July 19th, but you shouldn't really count my vote, we're moving sometime around the 15th-20th and I'm not sure I can even make the 19th :-(.
As for the motorcycles I'm suprised some of the bigger ones could get 55MPG too, it kind of makes going for a 250cc not make as much sense if I can have the power of a 1200 and still get similar milage.
|
|
6/16/2009, 11:48 am
|
Send Email to itjstagame
Send PM to itjstagame
|
Mark Long
Administrator
Global user
Registered: 10-2006
Location: Clinton, NY
Posts: 437
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
quote:
itjstagame wrote:
As for the date, I'd vote for July 19th, but you shouldn't really count my vote, we're moving sometime around the 15th-20th and I'm not sure I can even make the 19th :-(.
Do you need someone to get that CRX out of your yard before you move?
---
Mark Long
34 E
|
|
6/16/2009, 12:17 pm
|
Send Email to Mark Long
Send PM to Mark Long
AIM
Blog
|
Mike Kamm
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2004
Location: Averill Park, NY
Posts: 5583
Karma: 18 (+19/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
I was looking high and low for a coefficient of drag spec for my B210. A moderaor over at Datsun 1200 forums came up with 0.42, but this is for the earlier Datsun 1200. I am working on getting one for the B210. In any case, a gent from Australia had a great reply to my posts over there. Check this out:
"Drag co-efficient is basically a percentage or ratio of the amount of drag induced compared to a flat board of the same frontal area. This is the important thing to keep in mind - a car with low drag but a huge frontal area (say the front of a high speed train) will still take more energy to push it along at a given speed compared to something with a poorer cd but a much smaller frontal area. We have cars with relatively small frontal areas, so we are still doing 'ok'.
That said, we should always try and minimise drag on competition stuff (and going for max economy is just as much a competitive undertaking as racing is). Believe it or not - on the 'supercar from yesteryear' the Lamborghini Countach - they actually 'lost' around 10mph off their top speed with the addition of an optional rear wing.
If I was trying to get a cheapish improvement to aerodynamics for economy purposes, although aesthetically it might not look as good, I'd give serious thought to lowering the rear 1-2 inches lower (compared to standard or 'level') than the front ride height. This would do 2 things - 1 reduce the overall frontal area, and 2 drop the relative angle of the front windscreen. It should reduce drag, and interestingly, also increase front castor a little, which wouldn't hurt for straight line stability."
Good stuff! Lowering the rear more than the front? I never would have thought of that. Makes sense to me. Watch for a B210 tail dragger at the next event. 
|
|
6/17/2009, 6:05 pm
|
Send Email to Mike Kamm
Send PM to Mike Kamm
|
Mark Long
Administrator
Global user
Registered: 10-2006
Location: Clinton, NY
Posts: 437
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
quote:
Mike Kamm wrote:
Good stuff! Lowering the rear more than the front? I never would have thought of that. Makes sense to me. Watch for a B210 tail dragger at the next event.
Very easy to do with your live axle over leaf spring. Some blocks and longer u bolts and you are done.
---
Mark Long
34 E
|
|
6/17/2009, 7:52 pm
|
Send Email to Mark Long
Send PM to Mark Long
AIM
Blog
|
ZX2 2000
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2004
Posts: 1091
Karma: 5 (+5/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
Cars in Nascar, during qualifying, did that in order to reduce drag from the spoiler,until it was outlawed.
Frontal area is as important,if not more so,than CD.
Another thing you could do. Take out the windshield and rear window, fashion a tonneau cover with just room for the driver.
Instant reduction in frontal area.
---
Dick Vedder
|
|
6/18/2009, 10:27 am
|
Send Email to ZX2 2000
Send PM to ZX2 2000
|
ZX2 2000
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2004
Posts: 1091
Karma: 5 (+5/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run thread
Then again, lowering the rear of the car increases underbody drag.
---
Dick Vedder
|
|
6/19/2009, 8:35 am
|
Send Email to ZX2 2000
Send PM to ZX2 2000
|
ZX2 2000
Registered user
Global user
Registered: 07-2004
Posts: 1091
Karma: 5 (+5/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: AMEC Economy Run III August 23rd
I went to a local car show last night. Looking at some of the 50's and 60's cars.
Chrysler and Cadillac for example, I thought wow talk about frontal area and a CD of "60+". No wonder they got 10 mpg.
---
Dick Vedder
|
|
6/24/2009, 4:55 pm
|
Send Email to ZX2 2000
Send PM to ZX2 2000
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 11/30/2009, 12:29 am
|
|
|
