Page 3 of 28
Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 11:08
by Kiril Varbanov
Front splitter at its best:
This is how you prepare for WRC - by stealing the bench from the park:
Huge, complex duffuser, over-exhaust-ed, with curly side skirts:
On the plus side:

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 13:25
by SiLo
My favourite car of all time for looks.
Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:01
by Belatti
What about group C?
covered rears
A diffuser that will never work?

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:03
by Belatti
following group c...... group b

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:07
by Belatti
Maki F1 car from 1974, almost 2 meters tall

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:10
by Giando
These 1994 412T1 sidepods intakes were gorgeous but terribly unefficient...

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:12
by Giando
And what about the magnificent B188 double airscoops?

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 17:13
by Giando
This 1973 Ferrari snowplough was also quite interesting...

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 18:36
by wesley123
What would this thread be without a GTP?

Absolutely love this car. Slow in a straight line, but so much downforce, it was incredible. There is fairly little on this car on the internet I believe.
And the Allard J2x-c

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 18:54
by xpensive
Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, beats the Chaparral 2H in this department;

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 19:33
by Sebp
Once again, the "Eagle Aircraft":

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 10 Dec 2013, 19:43
by xpensive
Oh Jackie...

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 11 Dec 2013, 04:47
by 1158
Smokey Yunick's Hurst Floor Shifter Special

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 11 Dec 2013, 12:45
by Huntresa
Why was it that they thought in the 60s that the wings must be 10 meters up in the air to be good and work ? Somehow it feels like they lacked rational thinkin back then, i mean air is air wheter its 10meters above the car or 10cm above it...
Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.
Posted: 11 Dec 2013, 12:51
by rjsa
Huntresa wrote:Why was it that they thought in the 60s that the wings must be 10 meters up in the air to be good and work ? Somehow it feels like they lacked rational thinkin back then, i mean air is air wheter its 10meters above the car or 10cm above it...
Wings do work better on clean air flow, they just are in the positions they have now because rules say so. Where designers given the choice wings would still me mounted on meter long poles.