oOple.com Forums

oOple.com Forums (http://www.oople.com/forums/index.php)
-   Schumacher (http://www.oople.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=46)
-   -   cab forward shells (http://www.oople.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87614)

bigred5765 09-12-2011 04:18 PM

cab forward shells
 
would you be interested in a cab forward shell for the cougar and the cat sx3
ill do a poll vote on both if you like
please be advised public vote:thumbsup:
I'm thinking finnisher style

lochness42 10-12-2011 08:23 AM

None of above - BittyDesign Mugen MBX6 Force style.

bigred5765 10-12-2011 02:43 PM

slightly similar to the finnisher, thats the kinda style i like

Origineelreclamebord 10-12-2011 02:54 PM

I really dislike the Cubic styling of the Finnisher and the Bulldog shells, I'm sorry :lol:

I suggest doing cab-forward shells like this:

http://www.ultimatetamiya.com/cars/m...olar-eagle.jpg
http://forum.globaltimes.cn/forum/at...0&d=1256192095
http://kedrix.rc.pagesperso-orange.fr/DSCF0018.jpg

Fighter plane-like cockpit, nicely rounded, flowing and aerodynamic shapes (without creating something resembling an ocean like the TRF501X :lol:). I could scan or make some pictures of drawings I made over the last year of cab-forward shells to show more clearly what I mean.

With that said, I don't own an SX3 :p However, if I'd buy a 4WD I do have serious interest in an SX3 - that, or a DEX410.

bigred5765 10-12-2011 02:58 PM

the problem with the rounded approach is they don't provide the down force the square cab does, the flat face works as a air dam,

Origineelreclamebord 10-12-2011 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred5765 (Post 592963)
the problem with the rounded approach is they don't provide the down force the square cab does, the flat face works as a air dam,

Isn't it possible to create similar/the same results with setup instead of changing a whole shell? I like to think shells can be shaped to primarily serve the cause of aesthetics :thumbsup: And if you want proper front downforce, getting a front wing may help? :lol:

bigred5765 10-12-2011 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Origineelreclamebord (Post 592966)
Isn't it possible to create similar/the same results with setup instead of changing a whole shell? I like to think shells can be shaped to primarily serve the cause of aesthetics :thumbsup: And if you want proper front downforce, getting a front wing may help? :lol:

not really, nope , and cant be done right

Origineelreclamebord 10-12-2011 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred5765 (Post 592969)
not really, nope , and cant be done right

Pityful. I'd still go for a front wing, though that gives a bit more understanding as to why so many of those front cab shells are popping up, often with a front window as square as possible :)

Of course moving the cab further forward is an option, but I guess a less rounded body would indeed be a more efficient option :lol:

Chillout47 21-12-2011 08:39 PM

I REALLY can't stand cab forward shells, I would honestly rather go a second a lap slower than watch that ugly dog go past me every lap.

Each to their own though...

Freakypen 21-12-2011 09:49 PM

Cab forward bodies I'm sure have their uses-but if it made my car 1 sec a lap faster...I'd still be slower...as I'd purposely ramp it into track markers because its so damn ugly...:lol:
P.S. Apologies-not very helpful to the thread I know!

ASKay 22-12-2011 12:11 AM

So here goes some fun maths.... don't shout if i got it wrong! :)
 
Next thing we will be buying wind tunnels for our cars, and designing via CFD at 15K a pop. Do you really get significant enough down force at the speeds we are talking about, on the straight I can image we do, but then that is the place that we least want it (DRS a particularly good example).... On the corners the resulting force (I have not worked this…. Yet….) is probably not a great deal of Newton’s, however maybe this might put it into presective.

Car travelling at 45Mph
This is 72.42Km/h
Therefore 20.11667 m/s
Area of the aero device is (model car windscreen) 60mm * 80mm
Therefore H= 80E-3 high by W=60E-3 wide in meters
We do not know the Co-ef of friction for the car so assume it is a perfect 1
Air density at sea level around 1.2
Angle of attatck of the aero surface 30 degrees therefore 0.52 radians

So one method works via F (in Newtons) = 0.5*(L*W*AoA)* ρ*F*V^2

Therefore F=0.5*80*10^-3*60*10^-3*0.52*1.2*1*20.11667^2

If we solve this F = 0.60N so 0.06Kg Force which if you divi by two wheels assuming its is all loading over the front equates to 0.03KgF…

Not a great deal of benefit, but then I guess you are taking what little downforce you have, and are simply moving it towards the front wheels rather than rear ones….. so I hope I got the sums right, but it think the following

I think the body is all about aesthetics and I am not a fan of the cab forward shells, however it would be nice to see a SX3 shell with kind lines, I have a love hate relationship with my current SX3 shell.... Therefore think the Finnisher is nice and I would get one...

canon67 24-12-2011 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred5765 (Post 592694)
would you be interested in a cab forward shell for the cougar and the cat sx3
ill do a poll vote on both if you like
please be advised public vote:thumbsup:
I'm thinking finnisher style

Is there not one available by FTW

bigred5765 24-12-2011 03:26 PM

there is but its the ugliest thing you'll ever see

Rat Monkey 26-12-2011 01:50 AM

Nice calculations ASKay, couldn't tell you if your right or not but to say the amount of force is insignificant I'm not so sure. 0.06 kg is 60g and in the grand scheme of things not that great, but plenty of people add weight to their cars of about this amount and feel it improves things, so maybe even a small amount of extra downforce is enough to help?

ASKay 26-12-2011 02:15 PM

Thank you.... remember the calc is for a high velocity, and not a realistic corner speed, so to add a curve which gives an indication..

I think this is worthy of its own thread..... be good to model the down force v mass and centripetal force downside.

http://www.oople.com/forums/picture....pictureid=4674

so you can see that at 10mph you get very little back, I have used a different angle of attatck as well 45 degrees, as well as a bigger area...but then at some point the angle of attatck increase will stop working and just create drag, this equation does not identify that change, and I do not know when it breaks.

so at 10mph, adding weights will work way better, but on a fast corner track then an aero method would work better...

appols for temp highjacking thread, back to topic......

p.s. are you thinking/hoping someone will make one for the SX3, or are you thinking of doing one yourself???? if so then I would buy one, just for something different....

bigred5765 26-12-2011 02:26 PM

and back to my thread

fastinfastout 27-12-2011 01:23 AM

regardless of the physics, cab forward bodies DO make a difference!

Origineelreclamebord 27-12-2011 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigred5765 (Post 598652)
there is but its the ugliest thing you'll ever see

I don't really agree on this, it may not be a stunner but it looks better.

What puzzles me is why they'd make the sidepods so high - it could just as well counteract the forward placed cab (especially since it's rounded)? :)

Anyway, wouldn't it be easier to develop a front wing set for the SX3? Perhaps even with front wings that mount on the suspension arms themselves? (After all there's loads of open space there to play with).

PS: Sorry to keep going 'off-topic', but if you look at what your question is about, it's whether people would like more front downforce on their SX3s :p

Cardnim 28-12-2011 11:57 AM

Was interesting to read that Tom Cockerill test ran a cab forward shell on his Cat, but decided it didnt make enough of an advantage to keep it and has returned to the standard.

My choice would be for the bulldog style as I can see this giving more downforce where its needed (i.e. at the front) - its just unfortunate that it looks ugly as sin! :bored:

The finnisher looks way better but too far back to make a big difference I would have thought.

bigred5765 28-12-2011 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardnim (Post 599622)
Was interesting to read that Tom Cockerill test ran a cab forward shell on his Cat, but decided it didnt make enough of an advantage to keep it and has returned to the standard.

My choice would be for the bulldog style as I can see this giving more downforce where its needed (i.e. at the front) - its just unfortunate that it looks ugly as sin! :bored:

The finnisher looks way better but too far back to make a big difference I would have thought.

ill make em look good, bulldog and finnisher style:thumbsup:
ps tom tried the bulldog and said it gave to much front end which is why he went back to std shell


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
oOple.com