fastmover

Do you run a track mate or something simular? I found it to be quite usefull to determine what effects, changes to the car made. It allows you to disect your runs in segments and see if more aero overall helps or hurts the cars performance. My buddy lost top speed on the straights at VIR but made up a boat load of time in the high speed turns, which in turn increased his overall lap performance (faster times). He put on a splitter and a larger wing. I dont mean to sound obvious either, I am just curious what people are using for data aquisition in the 44 world.

Semper fi

xupkid2

I have one of CPR's splitter and man does it work. The key thing is that you need to balance it with a rear wing because it creates so much downforce. I had it on my car for a weekend up at Road America with the stock rear wing and had to remove it because it was making the rear end very light in turn 3, the carousel and the kink. The kink was the scarriest part and as most know not the place to have a light rear end. Once I find a rear wing I like, it will definetly be going back on.

Van

I use a Traqmate. It's a pretty good system for the price. I won't have the splitter at the track until the end of July. But I'll get some real world data there (and maybe I'll try to do a direct back-to-back with the stock setup).

fastmover

Do you have it sync'd with the chase cam? I just finished setting it up with a chase cam on an GT3RS, I will also be putting a Traq Mate and chase cam into an Arial Atom next week. I can't wait to see the video from the Zone 2 this weekend at VIR with the telemetry data at the top of the video screen. It's gonne be cool.

Semper fi

333pg333

Hey no probs. I read the thread initially when I was busy at work. (Sorry Boss) So I didn't get the gist of some of the circumstances that Van was running it in. I thought that the implication was that there was a 10-15mph speed differential under the same gear / rpms and that's what threw me.

I've got one of those window-dash mounted GPS boxes that you can do times and splits etc. Haven't used it for more than times to date but must get my *** into gear on that. The traqmate setup with Chasecam looks really good. I would like to combine that with some true datalogging (gear, rpms, speed, boost, braking etc), then I think you'd have a great setup but also info overload possibly. I wonder if it's possible to combine data from an ECU with the GPS based info?

Van, I'd also be interested in what readings you get with the smaller V1 version? I have destroyed my V3 so might have to go back a notch as I have one in the shop.

Just in context and as a visual guide, see how much downward deflection was moving the rhs of the splitter. This is downhill in probably 4th gear and I don't think flat out as I was heat cycling those tyres in. So probably 80mph. (I have shorter final drive). We weren't running any side stays as ours were made of metal and I wanted to allow for upward deflection in case I rode the kerb, not wanting to break the splitter. As I later thought we should have done what Van has with the 4 cables.

333pg333

Do you have the V1 or the V3 version?

Van

I don't have the "chase cam" but I have the $200 traqvideo software to sync the video and save the movie. I think the syncing is quite easy.

The Traqmate has some good qualities - it's not super expensive (as data acquisition goes), the software interface is quite user friendly, and it can log 4 extra channels (in addition to RPM). Ultimately, I'd like to log more channels... but so it goes.

Right now I'm logging the ride heights. I'd also like to play around with logging boost pressure and air temps before and after the intercooler. I also want to log steering input and throttle position (and ideally brake pressure, too.)

It would be cool to get this data all at once, but for now I'm OK with leaving the sensors in place, but not having them plugged in. For example, now that I have good ride height data, I should use those input channels for the next project. If (when) I ever make a rear wing, I can hook those sensors back up to see if it's effective enough.

If I want to do engine tuning, I can monitor boost and intake temp, and maybe O2 (I don't know if a traqmate could log a wideband... I don't know how they make their signal...)

So many projects!

shiners780

Very cool Van. Thanks for posting that.

See you there!

944obscene

I want to see results of the V1 now. I don't expect anything near as dramatic. It's AOA is more aggressive, but being shorter... Well, I just expect it to help with drag underneath the car, and provide a little downforce at higher speeds.

Anything is an improvement over the apparent lift that I always assumed the 951 got, up top. Certainly something better for control around a small course like Hallett.

CPR

You will see some difference with the V1, but not as much as the V3.

One thing I will disagree with on this thread is the premise that a splittter is simply a "flat" piece of material. That is incorrect on so many levels, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. By definition any design that utilizes the principle if dividing ("splitting") the air into unequal pressured zones to:
1. generate greater stability through manipulation of low and high pressure air in relation to direction and flow continuity (SMOOTHING)
2. create greater transferred downward force through manipulation of the same high and low pressure air, relative to inceases in velocity=increase in transference. (SPLITTING)

Most flat units are designed that way because you have either a clearance issue, the nose base is level or relatively level to road surface, it is cheaper to cut a flat piece rather than mold/form one, and/or a flat unit is relatively easier to "tune" (so to speak) by using a myriad of aftermarket wings, height adjusters, aftermarket aero noses/air dams, etc., etc......all of which, for the most part do not exist for our cars, so we need to try and manipulate the air at a single forward point

So the principle of "Hey....it needs to just be flat so it can cut through the air", is not true, IMO, with these cars. It is WHERE and WHAT we do with the air with one piece that makes the difference. Whether it is mine or someone elses product...it needs to be right from the onset, or you will simply keep adding and adjusting to compensate for a critical piece that is not doing its job.

Just my opinion....doesn't mean sh^t

333pg333

I guess until someone comes up with a spare windtunnel we'll never know the full story CP. You have provided a good product, quickly and affordable. Sure we could postulate for hours and spend countless thou$ands coming up with improvements but we need to quantify change too.

Van

That's exactly what I hope I've done!

333pg333

...and thanks for that too Van.

PorscheDoc

I don't have the fancy equipment Van does, but i figure when the paint starts cracking on the bumper, then you know it is probably creating some downforce, lol A few years ago when I painted the nose, we got in a hurry to make a car show and forgot to put flex in the paint.......ooops

CPR

Van,

GREAT work by the way! Really interesting data, when or if I get my health back in order, I'll send you whatever units you want for testing and D-logging. I think what you are doing and the time, energy and equipment you are investing is awesome AND a great contibution to the community.

Also, I was working on a new prototype before the accident....I would love to get a mock/test unit done of that one and see what readings you get. Although in my current state, that is a ways away.

One more thing...is it possible to get any readings at the rear valance (underneath)? The reason I ask is that with either unit one of the main goals and the reason it has a slightly "downward" lip was to deflect a more than "typical" (25-65-10es. vs. the goal of 15-75-10, % of under/over/static flow) amount of air over the car. Just curious.....

And again, great work, You have too many cool toys