Ciro Pabón wrote:1. I don't know if the lift that tomislavp4 mentions is related somehow with the air you wish to direct to the undertray. In this case, maybe part of the downforce generated in the Manchild Nosecone could cost downforce at the undertray, because it would rob it of air.
allan wrote:i agree with tom on this idea...
I thought some supercars used this design too, such as the F50 and the Paganni, am i right?
MMUK wrote:I reckon going with the inverted aperture would be better, feeding more air under the car.
MMUK wrote:It would have to include a simple front wing though, to gain a better understanding of the required onset angle onto the aperture.
modbaraban wrote:It would be perfect to have a model of an existing car to run it with and without the aperture to see the difference.
Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Twitter [Bot] and 2 guests