Aerodynamic auto designs, past and present, and their possible implications

[The Toecutter]

Hmm. I'll have to ask that to Phil Knox. He did both, so I'm sure there was a reason for it. I figure that even with a dam, airflow will still go underneath the vehicle, and projections/rough surfaces could still generate turbulence.

For the looks department though, I rather dislike air dams. If I were to choose one or the other, I'd choiose a bellypan.

The benefit of the airdam howevr is that by restricting the airflow underneath, sideskirts can also have a benefit, adding to the reduction.

A further advantage of air dam/side skirts is not only reduced drag, but increased downforce for high speed stability. Usually, downforce and drag reduction are mutually exclusive!(notice that Formula 1 cars have a Cd around 0.8!)

[n0rt0npr0]

haha, I'm going to try to round my air dam as much as possible tommorow. Did you ever ask Phil why he did the dam and the underbelly?

Originally Posted by The Toecutter

Hmm. I'll have to ask that to Phil Knox. He did both, so I'm sure there was a reason for it. I figure that even with a dam, airflow will still go underneath the vehicle, and projections/rough surfaces could still generate turbulence.

For the looks department though, I rather dislike air dams. If I were to choose one or the other, I'd choiose a bellypan.

The benefit of the airdam howevr is that by restricting the airflow underneath, sideskirts can also have a benefit, adding to the reduction.

A further advantage of air dam/side skirts is not only reduced drag, but increased downforce for high speed stability. Usually, downforce and drag reduction are mutually exclusive!(notice that Formula 1 cars have a Cd around 0.8!)

[The Toecutter]

Never got around to it.