Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

It has been rebuilt... "new" track car

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-15-2005, 08:27 AM
  #46  
MPD47
The Carnage King
Rennlist Member
 
MPD47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,476
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Yeah, it's because this topic was linked in the intake manifold thread that Ted brought back from the dead.
Old 08-15-2005, 08:33 AM
  #47  
Sam Lin
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Sam Lin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gilbert, AZ, USA
Posts: 3,787
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor
why does everyone with a race car remove the rear underbody valence? It's not just for looks.. it actually works....
Once you put on a real rear wing, it's very easy to get too much downforce in the rear. Removing the valence actually makes the wing's adjustment range more usable.

Sam
Old 08-15-2005, 09:13 AM
  #48  
Rich Sandor
Nordschleife Master
 
Rich Sandor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 8,985
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Once you put on a real rear wing, it's very easy to get too much downforce in the rear. Removing the valence actually makes the wing's adjustment range more usable.
Then that shows exactly how effective the rear valence really is. I would think it would be more efficient to run with the valence, and a less effective wing, instead of a more effective wing, and no valence. Reason being, a wing creates more drag then the rear valence in proportion to how much downforce they create.



Quick Reply: It has been rebuilt... "new" track car



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 03:13 PM.