When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Viewed a thread about boring the rear hood brace on the horizontal plane with a hole saw + removing the cowl weather strip to vent under hood pressure . No follow up info was posted. Personally I do not think venting the hood at the cowl is worth it. IMHO the rear of hood/windshield base is a high pressure area @ speed. I used that area for carb intake on the track cars, cup cars also use that area for the intake.
Extensive testing on my part (1/2 mile track car) = the front intake for engine cooling needed to be 45% of radiator sq in. Ran the cars without any cooling fans. When on a 1/4 mile track a small 4 blade fan was used. Slow speed caution flag laps were the problem.
IMHO hood louvers + larger fender gills would help reduce under hood pressure/drag. A longer front air dam + side skirts may also help. See avatar, I used plastic material from a chassis shop. It will clearance itself
I've spoken to two engineers on this matter before, and they both say the same thing; it isn't the raw coefficient that makes the c4 a king of aero, but how the body handles area of pressure in specific/different locations. They both cited the rear.
This isn't something you'll be able to design yourself and just slap on. You'll need some real modeling.
I watched an engineering video from Chevy once. It stated that out of all the Corvettes the c5 spent the most time in the tunnel. Primary reason: it had to beat the c4. It was a time consuming effort.
Watch other engineering videos on the c7, they explain how the used systems from the c4 or made hybrid systems from it.
From: Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.
St. Jude '03 thru '24
Originally Posted by JohnC485
I've spoken to two engineers on this matter before, and they both say the same thing; it isn't the raw coefficient that makes the c4 a king of aero, but how the body handles area of pressure in specific/different locations. They both cited the rear.
Which has me wondering if removing the spare tire carrier impacts fuel economy?
Which has me wondering if removing the spare tire carrier impacts fuel economy?
Anything that is going to upset how the area in the rear works is going to negatively impact it and increase drag and really change the scope of everything.
Which has me wondering if removing the spare tire carrier impacts fuel economy?
I've been a RCH above 170 without the spare tire carrier. (gps telltale always reads higher than the data logs)
Maybe I'll replace the carrier and see what happens.
however, with the number of years the C4 used in motorsport somebody has had to have done the research on drag reduction .
IMO They look great and if they work as well as they looked they be the ticket.
Especially with a working diffuser/partial belly pan
Thanks dogfish. I read that thread the first time it came around and would have posted to it, but the new thread age rule probably would have resulted in a lock.