In somewhat of a defense to John Burk's Quote from the Aerodynamics book, I
see at least some merit in the statement "A shape that had a CD of . 25 and 4"
ground clearance would have a . 26 CD if it was 2 1/2" off the ground and .
35 CD if it only had 3/8" clearance " I think it might have to do with where
the air is directed to if it isn't allowed under the car, it's path of least
resistance prior to being lowered. Would not less room for air passage cause
more pressure and therefore more resistance? I bet there's a few people out
there are thinking along these lines but are newbies like me or just accept
the status quo, as in put it on the deck, everybody else does.
It seems that a relatively streamlined car, ala Corvette, RX-7, Honda
Insight or such, with a nose-down attitude would generate enough downforce to
counter lift with a car with a 4in frontal ground clearance and classically
raised
rear. Obviously, a car with a smooooth clean belly pan would be ideal to
prove this.
Flame and educate, I await constructive commentary.
Bob, Aero-head, W
|