jacob300zx

Real world testing has confirmed the flat front/small splitter/under tray past axle line to be far more efficient in creating anti-lift. You have a junk yard at your disposal, you should test different front end configurations. I think you will come to the conclusion that many of us already have.

Keith@FM

iTrader: (1)

You seem quite offended by the fact that I'm not running the status quo. I apologize for that. I've got some other interesting areas I want to play with at the moment, so the front end is liable to stay the way it is for a while. But thanks for your concern.

chpmnsws6

iTrader: (12)

It's ugly and Keith is probably using the car as a dual purpose car. Play and sell products. They also cater to a little different crowd then the 949 boys.

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

Not only this, but if plucas's simulations had the same surface area on both the #4 and #6 splitters the #4 would make more downforce.

Keith, I want to see how your canard experiments go. I need to find some more front downforce somehow, my 6" from the bumper splitter that's the same style as yours doesnt make enough downforce to balance out my massive dual element wing.

Midtenn

iTrader: (15)

I can also see downforce being more important to Keith due to the "low" speed nature of most T&D rallies.

Shahab

iTrader: (2)

I created the model for Paul's CFD runs based on my car's setup who's main purpose is autocross and some hpde type events. The CFD numbers don't lie, those are results from many runs to verify mesh and quality of the results.

When comparing these setups real world testing is important, but could there be other factors skewing the results? The driver, the setup, the ambient conditions? CFD gives you much greater control over these variables and by that I mean 100% control.

Will the results of our case study change your opinion? Obviously not. However I do feel that the current crusher setup with the flat front and a splitter is pretty ideal at reducing, lift, drag, and creating downforce on these cars.

Keith@FM

iTrader: (1)

Note that my comments about the CFD results were comparing jacob's original statement - flat front/no splitter vs stock nose/splitter. Once you put a splitter on the flat front, it starts to perform better. Jacob changed his statements. And some of them were just plain wrong - the CFD shows that my setup does not generate "a ton of drag" and "slight lift".

But I'm okay with that. I get to play with my canards and I have a more flexible setup for different venues. In the rally, I need something that's damage resistant, and my current setup will flex upwards nicely if it grounds out. I hit the same speeds on the Targa Newfoundland as I do at Laguna Seca, BTW. Granted, I could be faster at Laguna Seca, but it's not a night-and-day difference.

Again, I'm not against the flat front. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. If I have, find those statements and prove me wrong. I just haven't gone that way with my car for various reasons of my own. Marketing is NOT one of them, as the Targa Miata is my personal car and I don't make any money from selling parts with it.

Any further front end experimentation will probably be with end plates on the splitter, because I find this interesting. And that's the important thing to me - it's interesting. I don't learn by following a cookbook. But I've got at least two other aspects of aero that I want to play with first, one of which hasn't been tried on a Miata as far as I know and the other hasn't been closely checked out.

Leafy, the canards work quite well - better than I expected. I don't have any numbers on them showing before/after times, but when I installed them between sessions at High Plains Raceway I picked up some good front end grip. It was most noticeable on turn-in, but the car keeps the same balance at speed as it does in low speed corners.

Shahab

iTrader: (2)

Sorry if I didn't make it clear, but I was reiterating your point that the CFD results back you up.

And I wasn't saying that you in particular should change to a flat front type setup just throwing my opinion out there on what is likely the ideal setup for most track miatas based on my experience and CFD results. (keep in mind I don't run this on my car)

We will also be doing some CFD experimentation soon with various gurneys on the portions of the air dam in front of the wheels. Based on previous experience with other vehicles there is the potential for increased downforce with little to no increase in drag but this will require some experimentation to be optimized.

speedricer

I would like to bump this very interesting thread with a question-
I will very soon be doing some bodywork, I wanted to slightly "widebody" the car to fit a bit more tire. I also was interested in running a flat front/splitter, so since the flat front can be "custom" aligned to the fender, can I simply pull the whole fender out a small amount like the red one did to vent air, and do a follower underneath that? I like the idea of the follower but don't like the look of the open rear tire. I know aesthetics don't necessarily deserve a place in this thread, but if my idea is also aerodynamically feasible, it would be the route I would like to take. Looking forward to more interesting research from you fine bunch of fellows, good day.

mx5autoxer

iTrader: (1)

You're right. You have it very backwards for a place like this. Also, go do a meet-and-greet thread, then we'll talk...maybe.

M.Adamovits

'Speedricer'.... Lol..


Anyways, for those of you who have done the DIY splitters from plywood, what did you attach the rear of the splitter to at the subframe?


Mike

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

I didnt.

I'm trying to figure out V2 right now, it probably going to get something back there that just stops it from getting jammed backwards when it gets rammed into the pavement. The transition to the hill at T4 at NHMS and some of the transitions from one concrete block to another at lincoln really bent the **** out of the mounts.

M.Adamovits

Just skimmed your build thread. Are you considering attaching it to the subframe?

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

In some way, even its its just something that sticks up and prevents the splitter from getting pushed backwards. Any force from downforce is actually pushing the rear of the splitter up on mine, and the current mounting is more than strong enough for that. Its the front of the splitter hitting things that is bending the mounts. There is that convenient tab right in the middle that could potentially be used.

M.Adamovits

I was noticing that specifically this morning, as well and the 6mm bolt hole for the splash guard, though I've all but decided against them, thinking they won't be near strong enough on an impact.

Handy Man

There are two convenient threaded tabs you can use. They are at the front of the subframe below the steering rack. They aren't the strongest mounting points, but I'd rather have the splitter break off than bend the subframe.

jpreston

iTrader: (4)

I used those for my first undertray. They held up fine under aero loads but bent back/down and failed in an impact.

My second iteration (for a splitter) used a round bar bolted on with the front bolts of the steering rack bracket, then hooks attached to the splitter for a quick disconnect setup. The heaviest hooks I could find were still pretty light duty and bent when I dropped two tires on corner exit and the splitter caught dirt.

Current setup that I'm testing this weekend is what emilio alluded to a page or two ago with a "tongue" cut into the splitter that then gets wedged into the area between the steering rack mounting points and rests on that pinch weld on the subframe. It goes under the rack and over the pinch welds. It's a tight fit and has very little vertical play with the front hard mounted. (I'm not a fan of cables for the front.) All of the metal subframe/steering components in that region are pretty beefy, so the expectation/hope is that the wood will just splinter and buckle on impact. My only concern with this setup is that it could buckle upward enough to take out the radiator, but I'd probably have bigger problems than the radiator at that point.

Haven't taken any pics yet since I'm reusing my old cracked and splintered but still functional splitter to test this setup. I can snap a pic or two tonight if anyone can't picture what I'm talking about.

mr_hyde

iTrader: (4)

I set mine in place that then drilled and tapped two M6 1.0 into the subframe where the splitter made contact. I haven't dealt with an impact but I'm sure the two small bolts and/or plywood would disintegrate before anything structural bent.

Supe

I used turnbuckles and eye hooks. Worked well, and when I crashed, the eye hooks gave way. Made it easy to remove, too.

Supe

Anyone here dabbled with side skirts? Trying to figure out how I want to approach mine. I have side exit exhaust, so I'm thinking thin aluminum sheet bent into a 90 to come out and down from the rockers to decrease ground clearance, with a possible taper near the front wheels (again, take a look at the Peugeot T16). Optionally, I can frame them out of aluminum tubing or brake line and make a light pair out of fleece/fiberglass, but it would sure suck to go through all that work and then lose it in an off-track excursion. Would also need some sort of insert to protect it from the exhaust exits, which is why I'd prefer the aluminum.