3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

Third Gen. Aerodynamics

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-12-05, 07:40 PM
  #51  
1993 RX7 R1

 
Mr. Stock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dgeesaman
As I understand it, the undercarriage covers make a tremendous difference in getting negative lift. Ferrari can afford a few thousand dollars to cover the undercarriage with special pieces no problem, but on the 35k budget of the FD I imagine Mazda engineers did what they could with a lot less.
Ferrari began to incorporate aerodynamic enhancements to the underbody of their "passenger cars" starting with the F355. The smooth underbody along with venturis is what is causing the car to have downforce. But this has little to do with how much the actual underbody pieces cost. It has more to with the commitment of the car manufacturer to engineer such a design, having the techknowledge know-how and the budget to design, test and implement it.(And yes, I do understand that this would increase the overall budget of the development of the car.)

Originally Posted by dgeesaman
Plus, what Kento said is all-important - racing performance is a tradeoff of aerodynamic drag, appearance, downforce, engineering/wind tunnel cost, and cooling. A race team might be happy more downforce at the cost of drag if they need it by next month and giving up some top end speed is not an issue if this moves them faster in the corners (keeping in mind that faster corner speed can create higher straightaway speeds). Or, a race team may happily give up a few mph top end if their engines have been overheating before the end of the race, and they don't have the time or budget to ensure the drag coefficient is the same or better.
Read my post above. To me, Ferrari 355, at its introduction is 1995, represent the pinnancle of sports car design in terms of aerodynamics. It has achieved a reasonably low coefficient of drag and at the same time, a downforce inducing body. I hate to sound like a Ferrari fanatic, but the more I think of it, the aerodynamics of the F355 is a quantumn leap forward in "passenger car" design.

Originally Posted by dgeesaman
Mazda engineers aren't dumb - I'm sure they would like a negative lift coefficient, but that's getting nitpicky for a car that will in most cases never exceed 130mph in its lifetime. Although an excellent track car, it wasn't designed strictly for 130mph+ driving.
I agree that Mada engineers are not dumb. I think they did a fabulous job with the FD3S. Otherwise, I would not have owned it for 12+ years.
But the top speed of the car is 150 MPH plus. And the single goal of Mazda for the FD3S was to build a no-compromise sports car. I think they have done an admirable job. However, it's not perfect and there is room for improvement.

Originally Posted by dgeesaman
For any of us to stand about and assume that any aftermarket (or stock) part is optimized for maximum downforce, with minimal additional drag, and with extensive wind tunnel or CFD testing to ensure the change improves all aspects of the aerodynamics, is silly. No matter what we do, a bolt-on is still a bolt-on, and is difficult to fully integrate into the original design without the original design data. To engineer an aero product to that level is way more money that can be justified by aftermarket sales volume.
I agree. But as a somewhat-informed weekend warrior of a racer, I would like to know what really went into the design of these aftermarket parts. But alas, there is paucity of data regarding proof of testing and data.


Originally Posted by dgeesaman
That said, sometime I'd like to tinker with a CFD tool and use an FD body as the model. Just like that Ferrari team did, but not playing for keeps. It would take a very accurate CAD model of the car first, which is why it's just an idea.
I commend you for even thinking about doing this...since I have neither the skills or the tools to do this.

Ed

Last edited by Mr. Stock; 01-12-05 at 07:48 PM. Reason: to be more clear
Old 01-12-05, 07:50 PM
  #52  
2/4 wheel cornering fiend

 
Kento's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 3,090
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Mr. Stock
However, for a race car or a sports car, fuel economy and straight-line speed is not top priority. Cornering speed, I would say is much more important, if not most important.
Not necessarily on a race car. On high speed circuits like Suzuka, Silverstone, Elkhart Lake, etc., as well as the oval tracks, there is usually a tradeoff between cornering grip and straight speed. You could dial in a ton of downforce and literally rail through the corners flat, but your tires and engine would be working overtime, and less powerful cars would be passing you down the straights, or even eventually pass you through the corners after your tires are shot. This is why wings and other external downforce components are adjustable.

Originally Posted by Mr. Stock
The F355, on the other hand, achieves downforce with its coefficient of lift which would make the car more stable as the speed increase.
You fail to mention that the F355 will need increasingly more horsepower as that speed increases, due to the downforce-induced drag. Which is why it needs a very expensively developed 3.5L V8 screaming at 8500 rpm to power it.

Originally Posted by Mr. Stock
To come from a factory, with downforce already designed into its stock body and achieving the above mentioned low drag numbers, I am much more impressed by the design of the F355 than the R1.
As was stated before, if Mazda had an army of engineers with a nearly unlimited budget to design a sports car that was going to sticker over $120K, then they surely would've pulled out all the stops. While I'm always impressed with Ferrari's innovative engineering, I'm not any less impressed with what Mazda engineers did within the constraints they were shackled with.
Old 01-12-05, 08:02 PM
  #53  
Sponsor
RX7Club Vendor
iTrader: (10)
 
FDNewbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 13,216
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Kento
As was stated before, if Mazda had an army of engineers with a nearly unlimited budget to design a sports car that was going to sticker over $120K, then they surely would've pulled out all the stops. While I'm always impressed with Ferrari's innovative engineering, I'm not any less impressed with what Mazda engineers did within the constraints they were shackled with.
Very well said. Depending on your perspective, you may actually see that Mazda did a much better job, in the sense that they were working on a cost budget 1/4 of that of the Ferrari, and who knows how much less of an R&D budget as well, yet STILL managed to produce such an awesome racecar.

Anyone (who's not a dummy) can manage to produce astounding results if the budget is big enough. Producing the same or similar results on a tremendously smaller budget...now that is a major accomplishment IMO.
Old 01-12-05, 10:49 PM
  #54  
Hi....

 
jeremyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: bay area
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FDNewbie
These CF peices on the front bumper:









The first two are the C-west ones, the second two are the FEED ones.
I know what they are... I was suggesting them... I may have missed it, but I didn't see that suggested in the past posts to this thread.

Jeremy

P.S. Thx for the pics though!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GraysGarage
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
18
02-22-18 11:54 AM
Neo
Canadian Forum
8
09-14-15 09:09 AM



Quick Reply: Third Gen. Aerodynamics



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:41 PM.