Anonymous

Wedgie, how aero?

The all purpose forum for any TR7/8 related topics.
roverman
Wedgling
Posts: 11
Joined: 03 Sep 2009 01:51
Location: USA
Contact:

Wedgie, how aero?

Postby roverman » 15 Oct 2009 02:42

Hi, Anyone got cf/d. specs. for coupe or roasdster? Frontal area? Tapley pull at various speeds? Anyone care about the air? Stratigizing for Huffaker TR8/GT1 coupe, for "Silver State Classic" in May/2010. Thanks, roverman.

Art Gertz

PeterTR7V8
TRemendous
Posts: 2914
Joined: 10 Jun 2008 02:22
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby PeterTR7V8 » 15 Oct 2009 02:49

How aero is the wedge? Not as much as you might think. There is some info here that might help. http://www.forum.triumphtr7.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9076

Image
Never say die. At least not while you're still breathing.

V8Wedgehead
Swagester
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 May 2008 22:30
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby V8Wedgehead » 15 Oct 2009 12:12

The Huffaker group ran the coupes for short track sessions where top speed was not an issue. When it came to speed they used convertibles. Ken Slagle had both a coupe and a convertible but due to aerodynamics and lift caused by the rear window went to the convertible. Group 44 was the only one to use a coupe for all race circuits. They had to add the 12-inch plus spoiler on the trunk at a certain angle so they could grab some free flowing air coming off the roof to get 400lbs of down force after numerous hours in a wind tunnel. The front end was never an issue but it was the rear window of the coupe that was the weak point for aerodynamics and speeds over 150mph.

Michael
1980 TR8 FHCs; Rally Conversion #0020 & Stock #0058
ImageImage
If it is broken then fix it....if it is not then make it faster!"

TR7Aaron
Wedge Pilot
Posts: 334
Joined: 16 Feb 2008 01:01
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby TR7Aaron » 15 Oct 2009 13:24

"...but it was the rear window of the coupe that was the weak point for aerodynamics and speeds over 150mph."

Somehow, I don't think this will be an issue for most of us.:)

Aaron
1976 TR7 FHC (an ongoing project)
Image

V8Wedgehead
Swagester
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 May 2008 22:30
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby V8Wedgehead » 15 Oct 2009 14:17

Propably 99% of us. I went 145 in a coupe once and it was getting squirlley and created a "pucker factor"!

Michael
1980 TR8 FHCs; Rally Conversion #0020 & Stock #0058
ImageImage
If it is broken then fix it....if it is not then make it faster!"

Beans
TRemendous
Posts: 7823
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 19:29
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Beans » 17 Oct 2009 00:03

I read somewhere that the CF/CW-value for a TR7 was 0.39.

<center>Image
<font color="blue"><i>1981 TR7 FHC Sprint (better known as 't Kreng)
1980 TR7 DHC (my first car currently being restored)
In parts a 1980 TR7 PI DHC, 1981 TR7 DHC, 1981 TR7 FHC</font id="blue">
<font color="red">http://tr7beans.blogspot.com/</i></font id="red"></center>

Beans
TRemendous
Posts: 7823
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 19:29
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Beans » 17 Oct 2009 00:11

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Century Gothic, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by V8Wedgehead</i>

...it was the rear window of the coupe that was the weak point for aerodynamics <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Not sure about that, remember what went wrong with the original Audi TT at speed, and why [B)]
From an aerodynamic point of view the TR7 FHC with it's chopped of rear should be pretty stable ??? Time to put one in a windtunnel [:D]

<center>Image
<font color="blue"><i>1981 TR7 FHC Sprint (better known as 't Kreng)
1980 TR7 DHC (my first car currently being restored)
In parts a 1980 TR7 PI DHC, 1981 TR7 DHC, 1981 TR7 FHC</font id="blue">
<font color="red">http://tr7beans.blogspot.com/</i></font id="red"></center>

PeterTR7V8
TRemendous
Posts: 2914
Joined: 10 Jun 2008 02:22
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby PeterTR7V8 » 17 Oct 2009 00:54

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Century Gothic, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
From an aerodynamic point of view the TR7 FHC with it's chopped of rear should be pretty stable ??? Time to put one in a windtunnel
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Group 44 did that already and they found the air over the back was generating up to 700lbs of lift hence the 'normous spoiler. They didn't say what speed that was at though.

The Toyota MR2 Mk1 has a drag coef of 0.35 so our wedge will be very similar.

Image
Never say die. At least not while you're still breathing.

V8Wedgehead
Swagester
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 May 2008 22:30
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby V8Wedgehead » 17 Oct 2009 01:45

Lanky Foushee (Crew Cheif) and John Lyster (Body Man)from Group 44 mentioned through numerous conversations that about 150mph the car started to in a hurry generate lift.....I have a picture of the car without the spoiler in the wind tunnel. They had an aluminum adjustable spoiler to tune in the down force. They also used aluminum straps to keep the rear window in place from all the turbulance at the rear window besides being a safety requirement they were twice the width and thicker too than required. Ironic enough they even used a roof spoiler adapted from a BMW 3.0 CSL to pull air immediately down to the rear window in theory to put more on the spoiler which as Lank Foushe quoted was "completely usless POS" in the end. The car was good for 180mph at Daytona.

Michael
1980 TR8 FHCs; Rally Conversion #0020 & Stock #0058
ImageImage
If it is broken then fix it....if it is not then make it faster!"

Beans
TRemendous
Posts: 7823
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 19:29
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Beans » 17 Oct 2009 18:15

Some interesting info, thx

Will bear that in mind next time I am in Germany on the Autobahn and feel the urge to see what the cars top speed is [:D]

<center>Image
<font color="blue"><i>1981 TR7 FHC Sprint (better known as 't Kreng)
1980 TR7 DHC (my first car currently being restored)
In parts a 1980 TR7 PI DHC, 1981 TR7 DHC, 1981 TR7 FHC</font id="blue">
<font color="red">http://tr7beans.blogspot.com/</i></font id="red"></center>

Odd
TRiffic
Posts: 1969
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 08:49
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Postby Odd » 17 Oct 2009 20:22

Beans,
210+ will be easy to reach. 250+ ? Well, maybe not so easy...

Image <font color="red"><b>My two 1980 Wedges...</b></font id="red">
Image

Beans
TRemendous
Posts: 7823
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 19:29
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Beans » 17 Oct 2009 22:09

230+ was easy with the 3.45:1 diff in the Sprint, as long as there was enough free Autobahn left [:p]
With the 3.90:1 diff that is in the car now that will be more of a challenge ...

<center>Image
<font color="blue"><i>1981 TR7 FHC Sprint (better known as 't Kreng)
1980 TR7 DHC (my first car currently being restored)
In parts a 1980 TR7 PI DHC, 1981 TR7 DHC, 1981 TR7 FHC</font id="blue">
<font color="red">http://tr7beans.blogspot.com/</i></font id="red"></center>

Odd
TRiffic
Posts: 1969
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 08:49
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Postby Odd » 17 Oct 2009 22:35

With my 2.84:1 I'll be aiming for 270+ [:D]
but I know I'll chicken out long before. I know the (lack of) brakes in these cars... [xx(]

Image <font color="red"><b>My two 1980 Wedges...</b></font id="red">
Image

PeterTR7V8
TRemendous
Posts: 2914
Joined: 10 Jun 2008 02:22
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Postby PeterTR7V8 » 18 Oct 2009 10:09

To reach 270kph/170mph you would need a 300+bhp motor allowing for some loss between the flywheel & the rear wheels.

183mph = cube root ((300hp x 150,000) / (0.35 x 21)) ** The 0.35 is the drag coef of the wedge **

Big cajones would also be required.

Image
Never say die. At least not while you're still breathing.

Hasbeen
TRemendous
Posts: 6474
Joined: 28 Apr 2005 12:32
Location: Australia
Contact:

Postby Hasbeen » 18 Oct 2009 11:47

I have not had the 7 above 150Km/H, not really much point. Not too
good an idea in Oz now the boys in blue have forward facing radar in
their cars.

My Morgan +4, [no windscreen, small aero screen] in 63, when it had
only 79BHP, at 4600RPM at the wheels, [probably somewhat more at
5500RPM, but probably not to much more at 6300] was timed at
124.4MPH down conrod straight.

In 64, with 115 BHP at the wheels, same revs etc, was timed at 124.6
MPH, at the same place. So 36 BHP will give you 0.2 MPH, by that
reckonimg.

The best I got, with windscreen on was 115 MPH.

The 2.5L Brabham [claimed about 310 BHP] was timed at 174.6MPH same
place, in 68. A Ferrari P4, & a Lotus 19B, with 2.7L climax did 181MPH.

8 years earlier, 2.5L Cooper Climax [with no more than 210 BHP, were
timed at 186MPH, & may have been higher in other years.

The Coopers had 6 inch wide wheels, but by 68 the rear wheels were
up to 16 inches wide. The extra drag killed the speed in all the F1s
with those wheels.

My Brabham 1100cc Cosworth, with 108 BHP flywheel at 7600RPM, [may
have been a bit more at 8300RPM], & 6" front, 7" rear wheels did
145MPH same place, in 1967.

In a butchers picnic race, [20 fastest cars] at Lakeside, the P4
Ferrari, & a Traco Oldsmobile sports car, both had 15 MPH on the
Brabham, up the straight, but I could keep up, on half throttle,
with a tow from the Ferrari.

Why things get their speed is very interesting, & sometimes doesn't
make much sense.

Hasbeen

PS, Hay, Odd, how fast can you tow that van. With a late 50s V8
Chrysler, I used to tow my Brabham, in an enclosed trailer at 80, to
90MPH regularly, back when that was legal.

I once got it up to just over the 100MPH, on the long downhill
straights in Victoria, but I had to slipstream a semi trailer
pantechnicon to do it. Young & silly, you know.

H

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests