R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Nitro On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-22-2006, 11:23 AM   #91
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 4,148
Trader Rating: 28 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to Scott Fisher
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artificial-I
From the sounds of it before you were making negative downforce. This sounds pretty incorrect to me , not just inaccurate.

I think best bet is to keep your data private until you can get conclusive results, rather than take us through this learning process. I think the obvious is that an rc car handles better once a lexan body is on top of it. Pointing to the theory that they do create downforce.

Not that Im bashing your work , but quite obviously you got some bugs to work out and posting data thats not even near correct isnt going to help anyone. In fact its going to throw us off as your posting it as correct.

If someone didnt read this thread thoroughly they might be under the wrong impression and then that information spreads and well , I just dont like hearing things from someone thats completely wrong and im sure you as well.

If you can please go back and edit out your data until you feel confident in your results.
What you are saying may not be correct. It is quite possible that what he is saying is correct. You are assuming that what he is saying is incorrect based on the fact the car handles better with a body mounted. It is quite possible that the reason this is true is because of the following:

The car without a body on has a lot of lift.
Add the body and then the car has significantly less lift, but still has lift.

I know that the possibility of this being true exists.
I remember reading many years ago in Car and Driver or Road and Track (one of those car mags) that they had done some aero testing on a Porsche 911 and found that without the rear whaletail at high speed there was a lot of rear end lift. After adding the factory rear whaletail there was still measurable lift, but it was reduced by almost 90%.
__________________
| Capricorn | Ybslow | Proline-Protoform | Johnny Bravo Racing | Desoto Racing | Murnan Modified | Matrix Tires | Powermaster Fuel |
Scott Fisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 11:39 AM   #92
Moderator
 
Artificial-I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rurouni Kenshin
Posts: 3,459
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to Artificial-I
Default

Your point is moot , he already has data showing complete opposites. That means incorrect to me , but he wanted to say inaccurate...thats fine. No matter , its not data to go on.

As well....thats not the issue at hand who is correct and im not trying to act like Im correct. Im saying I do know that he was reading negative and now positive. I say before we go and draw our conclusions , we get him to actually conclude himself that its true before dragging us along with the learning process.

Simple as that. Glad you made your point , but its not really what was stated.
Artificial-I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 12:15 PM   #93
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Default

I personally like the M3 wide body 200mm on the ntc3... i'm thinking of making it look like the car from need for speed most wanted..
Attached Thumbnails
Body !!! What's the best ?-e0930802_1.jpg  
watchagotnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 04:40 PM   #94
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: west side, Mi.
Posts: 698
Trader Rating: 32 (97%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by British Menace
Hi,

Artificial-I.

Not so much "incorrect" as not accurate enough.
We are only talking of grammes of aerodynamic forces acting on the bodies of these cars.
The difference between positive and negative lift can be as little as 4 - 5 grammes !!
Before with the Mazda 6 and Stratus 3.1 bodies I origially tested I could not
get accurate enough data to confirm actual down force or not.

Thats now changed!
With the rolling road I will also be able to get 'Airdam' effect on the cars..... ground effect.

Just to give a little insight into what real effect this can have even on our cars.
Putting on the Stratus 3.1.
Chassis ground clearence----5mm
Car in race trim with 50% fuel load.
35mph road speed with corresponding wind velocity.
Front of body was placed firstly at chassis ground clearence, then placed with front airdamas close to rolling road as possible without interference.
(Approx' 0.4mm)
The front C-l went from +0.5 to -0.8 !!!
This equates to actual downforce generation!

Now get this.............. with body clips removed and everything else unchanged, C-l changed to +0.75 and -0.25 in the same test !!
I know, I'm a little bit of a geek, but if you don't want these results just say.

Tony

YO, TONY, keep the info coming, i am enjoying the learning process. i could care less if you are right or wrong, you obviously have the drive to figure it out. i respect that drive tremendously. good job, keep it coming.
i run the stratus 3.1 in the midwest series, and wherever i race, good all around body, i have noticed more frt downforce by dropping the frt of the body. i also run my body 3mm forward to get more frt bite. i am going to try the parma type-m soon as i get one. looks like a killer body, why dont you test the type-m?
thanx

also here r a cpl of pics of my 3.1's
Attached Thumbnails
Body !!! What's the best ?-dscn1885.jpg   Body !!! What's the best ?-dscn1920.jpg  
__________________
john "apple" mcintosh, Roar onroad national champion, Roar region 5 champion.
www.modxrc.com.com www.diggitydesigns.com www.rcproductdesigns.com
www.robinsonracing.com www.gsracing.com www.fioroni.com Apples paints
Apl Hed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 04:47 PM   #95
Tech Elite
 
wallyedmonds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brampton ont canada
Posts: 3,662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Fisher
What you are saying may not be correct. It is quite possible that what he is saying is correct. You are assuming that what he is saying is incorrect based on the fact the car handles better with a body mounted. It is quite possible that the reason this is true is because of the following:

The car without a body on has a lot of lift.
Add the body and then the car has significantly less lift, but still has lift.

I know that the possibility of this being true exists.
I remember reading many years ago in Car and Driver or Road and Track (one of those car mags) that they had done some aero testing on a Porsche 911 and found that without the rear whaletail at high speed there was a lot of rear end lift. After adding the factory rear whaletail there was still measurable lift, but it was reduced by almost 90%.
i think i remember reading this too.
wallyedmonds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 04:54 PM   #96
Moderator
 
Artificial-I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rurouni Kenshin
Posts: 3,459
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to Artificial-I
Default

I respect what he is doing as well. I just think a disclaimer should be made if were going to be watching this learning process. I dont really enjoy it though , dont know how anyone else can enjoy seeing someone type information that changes from one day to the next. Kinda irritates me.

At least if anything make a new thread so its not mixed in with actual information thats being spread on some of the latest bodies out there.

I do hope he does figure it out and then Ill be more than willing to jump into what hes come up with. But until then, I think when he starts off by guessing most bodies will give positive lift. It kinda raises a red flag , especially when later on he contradicts it.

Thats like BK from nitrodynesystems releasing all his information and data only to come back later and tell everyone that based there decisions to purchase an item off that information. Kinda leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth.

I just want to be sure that what information is presented is what he finds to be verifiably correct.
Artificial-I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 05:32 PM   #97
Tech Champion
 
skengines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Blah Vegas
Posts: 5,292
Trader Rating: 226 (100%+)
Default

When painting the wing, should I paint on top or bottom?
skengines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 05:35 PM   #98
Moderator
 
Artificial-I's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rurouni Kenshin
Posts: 3,459
Trader Rating: 17 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to Artificial-I
Default

Bottom.
Artificial-I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 05:38 PM   #99
Tech Champion
 
skengines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Blah Vegas
Posts: 5,292
Trader Rating: 226 (100%+)
Default

Thanks Artificial!
skengines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2006, 07:36 PM   #100
Tech Elite
 
British Menace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 2,338
Default Clarification........

To some respect Artificial-I is right !
I'm afraid this is what comes of me sharing information too early.

My original findings were indeed different to those I have just posted.

Originally the results of C-l on the Stratus 3.1 were:-

Front: 0 C-l (zero)
Rear: -1.5 C-l (Negative)

Note: C-l is Lift Co-efficient.
Where + (Positive) is actual LIFT !!
And - (Negative) is actual DOWNFORCE !!

What I did fail to add was that my results were only accurate to +/- 0.5
on the C-l figures.
Hence the original Front C-l for the Stratus could have actually been anything from +0.5 to -0.5 (Positive lift to actual downforce!!!)
This I did try to say to some extent in my original post when I said that I would stop testing until I could get more accurate information.

My results now are within 0.1 grammes that equates to C-l figures accurate to +/- 0.15

I'm sorry for the confusion. I too can get a little eager for results some times...lol
Thankyou for challenging the findings Artificial-I. I hope this makes things a little more clear.

Tony
British Menace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2006, 02:33 PM   #101
Tech Rookie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Default

this is my first custom jobs...
watchagotnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2006, 04:12 AM   #102
Tech Elite
 
British Menace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 2,338
Default

Now thats a nice paint job................. and thats a nice car. Good job.
British Menace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2006, 08:53 AM   #103
Tech Adept
 
twan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: philly
Posts: 229
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

i just got the 3.1 still got to paint it. i here alot of things about where to put the wing & body. move the body up 3mm move the wing back. where would anyone start with a new car???? maybe should just do it stock??
twan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
12th scale gallery (Post your pics... body on and body off) akura2 Electric On-Road 560 03-27-2011 11:29 PM
matching recoil tc body and 1/10th scale alfa tc body twistedone R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 3 03-03-2008 06:48 AM
Hobao GPX4 Pro Rolling car with Mazda 6 body and Ford Truck body $500 murf37 Australia For Sale/Trade 0 08-20-2006 05:04 AM
Here I come again. CUSTOM PAINTED BODY DODGE STRATUS 190mm for RIDE RACING TEAM BODY SHOP UFO R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 13 02-04-2004 07:35 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 10:21 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net