Aero// Hardtop glass delete?
05-02-2016, 04:34 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: toronto
Posts: 142
Total Cats: 7
Aero// Hardtop glass delete?
NA, caged. W2W, T/A, lapping. splitter/GTC 200/hardtop. Tracks are high speed, Mosport GP, 140 MPH. Any consensus on hardtop glass delete for aero? Hurricane in cockpit past 80 MPH, unbelieveable buffeting. Searching brings up nothing conclusive, anybody do back to back testing on this?
Reply
0
0
05-03-2016, 06:03 PM
#2
I run no windows but still have hardtop glass (plexi actually). No buffeting problems up to 120mph.
My understanding was that for a low mount 3D wing, you keep the glass as the wing is designed to manage the central airflow over the roofline, unaffected by the removal of the window. For 2D wings though, you remove the window in order to provide more (and straighter) airflow over the centre of the wing.
My hardtop window will be disappearing when I move to a high mount 2D wing.
My understanding was that for a low mount 3D wing, you keep the glass as the wing is designed to manage the central airflow over the roofline, unaffected by the removal of the window. For 2D wings though, you remove the window in order to provide more (and straighter) airflow over the centre of the wing.
My hardtop window will be disappearing when I move to a high mount 2D wing.
Reply
0
0
05-06-2016, 03:29 PM
#6
Matt Andrew's back to back class championship winning NA at Super Lap battle/Redline time attack had aero designed by the now world renowned aero engineer Andrew Brilliant. He didn't have the rear glass and I would have to imagine that it was for a reason. Although, it was a custom carbon hardtop so there's a small chance that he just didn't buy a glass or lexan window for it. That was the situation with mine, I wanted actual glass and couldn't find one so I just ran without it. No problems to report with wind (hurricane) and for a track car without AC, the breeze is nice.
Reply
0
0
05-06-2016, 04:04 PM
#9
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,303
Total Cats: 1,216
Clearly he just wanted easy access to the adjusters on the remote reservoirs. 
That car (Matt Andrews) still holds the Miata record at Auto Club Speedway. *shakes fist*
That car (Matt Andrews) still holds the Miata record at Auto Club Speedway. *shakes fist*
Reply
0
0
05-06-2016, 10:16 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canberra, sort of
Posts: 1,090
Total Cats: 184
Two aspects to this, car drag, and wing performance. Wing performance is easiest to see, tuft the airflow in front of the wing and see what changes with/without the rear window, that should directly translate to changes to how the wing is working. My guess is that wing position would be a big factor in any changes brought about by a window-delete - the higher the wing, the less impact it would have. OTOH, maybe that extra flow in that location has a stabilising effect on the otherwise turbulent airflow off the rear window and/or reduces the downwash over the top onto the wing ...
More extensive tuft testing of the flow above the boot should show up what changes occur there, but you'd be interested in drag primarily and I am not sure exactly how turbulence manifests as drag. Coast-down testing might be the go for this?
Of course, it is easy just to follow what (seems to) work, but it is nice to understand what is happening, and perhaps why.
More extensive tuft testing of the flow above the boot should show up what changes occur there, but you'd be interested in drag primarily and I am not sure exactly how turbulence manifests as drag. Coast-down testing might be the go for this?
Of course, it is easy just to follow what (seems to) work, but it is nice to understand what is happening, and perhaps why.
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
joekitch
DIY Turbo Discussion
13
04-26-2016 08:52 AM
