Drive - Tuned! - Exige 710bhp
Discussion
pthelazyjourno said:
Maybe just the angle, but the rear wheels don't look like they fill the arches - look a bit inset ?
Or just the photographs / me? Think one of the pics is because the clam is hinged upwards, will no doubt affect perspective.
Or have you not finished fiddling with suspension etc yet?
There is 1/4" clearance between the tire sidewall and the inside of the fender when down and 3/4" from tire thread to clam when raised..Or just the photographs / me? Think one of the pics is because the clam is hinged upwards, will no doubt affect perspective.
Or have you not finished fiddling with suspension etc yet?
. 
That is a hard one to answer but is moving along now that the custom body work is done. I hate body work and my buddy's shop will never be the same with all the dust.
The cage will be done today and then it's new brake lines and so on. Once we get all the hard parts done we will strip it down to the frame and start cleaning and powder coating everything before it all comes back together...
I will never do another project like this again but it will be worth it in the end.... Now if we don't get a wet winter here I'll be a happy camper since this will have a bit of a learning curve getting use to all the changes made...
The cage will be done today and then it's new brake lines and so on. Once we get all the hard parts done we will strip it down to the frame and start cleaning and powder coating everything before it all comes back together...
I will never do another project like this again but it will be worth it in the end.... Now if we don't get a wet winter here I'll be a happy camper since this will have a bit of a learning curve getting use to all the changes made...
TheLastPost said:
the ronin said:
The new exhaust system will aid downforce..;)
Have you actually done any aerodynamic analysis?Reason I ask is that, obviously, downforce behind the rear axle line has a tendency to lift the front wheels, unless it's balanced by equal downforce at the front - which can be difficult to achieve on a 'sports racer' style car.
I had a mate who fitted the biggest f
k-off rear wing that money could buy to his Ultima, then wondered why it understeered like labrador on wet lino. Without the benefit of wind tunnel or telemetry results to prove otherwise, I find the comedy duck-tail on this car similarly worrying...
As for aerodynamic analysis I look at pretty pictures of Can Am cars and say "well that worked and that didn't for them" and most Can Am teams never went to a wind tunnel, they did their testing in the real world.. Hell even Porsche did real world testing over and over again, how many 917's were there ?
Feel free to bring over any 211 you own and we can run some lap times and see who needs to do more key-board aerodynamic analysis and who smokes the other in the real world...
Testing the dive planes in the driveway has worked in the past..
Testing the same rear wing at the same AOA used on my 193 mph Exige . This is on a stock 211 rear bumper that is now 13" wider.
Testing the front clam air channels by widening them again on my driveway....Now it has wider air channels to aid front end downforce.
If you think this body won't create downforce please bring your 211 out and as I said before we'll see who's right. Maybe a little money on the line to spicen things up a bit ?
Ronin's last monster went well and was developed over time.
Maybe it's not "F1" but "trial and error" (and a little experience) has worked very well for many who have been successful in motorsport.
Why is Frank any different ?
If it's not as intended I am sure it will be changed/improved.
Ex77
Maybe it's not "F1" but "trial and error" (and a little experience) has worked very well for many who have been successful in motorsport.
Why is Frank any different ?
If it's not as intended I am sure it will be changed/improved.
Ex77
TheLastPost said:
the ronin said:
Testing the dive planes in the driveway has worked in the past..
Yeah, that's what I figured. 
Seriously (and intended in the spirit of constructive criticism), at least rig up some pots on the suspension when you're done, so you can figure out how far wrong you are: I don't know many expert aerodynamicists who work it out with gaffer tape on their driveway.
I'll have to tell Simon he should check with you before he begins another trial and error project..
Who ever claimed to be an expert ?
But like I said before bring over your 680 whp 211 and we'll have a go on the track or road and see who's done it right...See some guys do while others b
h without ever doing a dam thing but 
TheLastPost said:
Exige77 said:
Maybe it's not "F1" but "trial and error" (and a little experience) has worked very well for many who have been successful in motorsport.
Yes, for sure. But it's resulted in some monumental fk-ups as well. Are you old enough to remember the Lotus 80? Exige77 said:
If it's not as intended I am sure it will be changed/improved.
Yes, I'm sure it will. I was merely asking whether any proper analysis had been undertaken - I've known more people get it wrong by trial and error than get it right, and it's cheaper and easier to make your mistakes in CFD than CRP. Having said all which, he'll probably be fine: I'm willing to bet that the air is so dirty behind the open cockpit and roll bar of a 211 that the duck tail will make f
k all difference, no matter how big it is. It would be interesting to know the end result, though, and it's easy enough to work out with a little basic telemetry.The end result will be the fastest/best handeling Lotus 211 on the freakin planet...
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff