goose and slower

CruiseGTi-R

Member
You believe in physics but haven't done the math. You also need to look at what the front of the car is doing.

Consider a car 2.5m long, with an overhang of 0.5m to the rear spoiler. Say the spoiler can produce a downforce of 40kg (good going for a road spoiler). Taking moments about the rear wheel to determine the reactions at the front and rear wheels, you get a downforce of 48kg to the rear wheel (note, more than 40kg) and a rather small 8kg lift at the front wheels. Yes, a clockwise moment about the rear wheel (if spoiler is past axle) will give an associated negative reaction at the front wheel. Agreed, its simple statics.

So the lift at the front is very small compared to the rear downforce. This small lift (in this case (not entirely unrealistic) of 8kg is easily overcome by any person simply sitting in the car, even filling the thing with washer fluid), hence its never detrimental to front grip.

Further and more fundamentally the speeds at which the rear spoiler produces any useful downforce at all, the front of almost any car in the world would be producing more than enough downforce by the very shape of its bonnet as a roughly aerodynamic shape.

Hence any theorectical uplift from an clockwise moment about the rear wheel is more than negated by inherent frontend downforce (and weight of people).

Problems arise with cars such as the Lambo Migura as unfortunately the front end shape produced lift at high speed. Yes a rear spoiler in this case would make this worse. But even here the contribution to front end lift would still be tiny.

Clarkson's recent ramble about the pathetic little boot spoiler on the Jag producing front lift is utter nonsense and is nothing more than a good cocktail party anecdote about the car.

To produce around 80kg of lift at the front (say just to offset the drivers weight) requires a rear spoiler 5m long (based on my example above).

Have you tried to lift the front of your car, you'd be able to lift more than the 8kg, but you'd soon get a feel for how much work a spoiler would have to do to affect front end grip.

Oh, and my goose still sucks for top end power...
 
Last edited:
A

AJ4

Guest
CruiseGTi-R said:
I'm off back to my day job, Structural Engineer (BEng Hons) lead designer on O2 Arena Roof
so basically your a roofer ? :lol:

If you insist on willy waving, I spent 6 years at the Royal Aircraft Establishment in Farnborough working in flight research and development, all my professional qualifications ( 4 years ) are in Aerospace Studies and Avionics, and I model airflow over fixed structures in great detail mathematically and in wind tunnels. You could say I am more than familiar with moving objects through an airflow and how it relates to the physical forces involved ;). I would say I'm reasonably qualified to comment on the subject because its exactly what I've done for a job all my life, not just a general degree in 'engineering'.

I currently work as a consultant spacecraft payload engineer for the space industry which requires a very strong physics background.

I'm not sure exactly how being a roofer makes you an expert on airflow anyway, I can only assume so the tiles don't blow off the roof ? :lol:

I don't answer posts about suspension, handling, brakes or transmissions because thats not my field and I'm not experienced or qualified enough to do so. Fortunately, for electronics and aerodynamics I am ;)

:thumbsup:

Put that in your (BEng Hons) pipe and smoke it ! :lol::lol::lol:
 

campbellju

Moderators
Staff member
front of the R does have (in all) bad understeer problems but personally i feel that is partly due to the fact that the setup of the car is for "Rally" and so generally the ride height is quite high and so the centre of gravity is high. This is why when people lower (within reason) and stiffen the body i.e. strut braces to prevent body flex, the cars handling is dramatically improved.
:rofl: :flame:

I still need to do some work otherwise I'd explain it but it ain't that simple I'm afraid Ant ;-)

Cruise. You've not mentioned speed at all. In fairness though I reckon the jag lifting will be more down to crap aerodynamics at the front rather than too much downforce at the rear. Manufactureres seem to be more cautious nowadays after average joe drivers spinning Audi TT's etc. My guess is the rear spoiler was put on for a similar reason in case Jaguar created an exciting handling car above 100mph :roll:

Also, has anyone seen the size of our rear spoiler recently :shock: . On the yahoo groups someone tried to take it off but found the back end so loose (on corners) they immediately put it back on again. Alledgedly they found the R spoiler generates 150Kg of downforce at 100mph.
 

campbellju

Moderators
Staff member
BTW Ant, that wasn't meant to sound as arrogant as it did, just still at work. I will happily bore the back legs off you at the next meet ;-)
 

nitrosgti-r

New Member
Dont mean to break up the fight/argument but what about mateys exhaust problems??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

My sugestion is, have you checked all the gaskets and joints for signs of leakages? especilally at the turbo elbow if youv gone for the turbo back option, as it tends to leak here. Apart from that, yeah maybe its ur ecu not been able to work it out or somat, lambada sensor etc? maybe do a fault code check for that? if not, i think that if you disconnect the battery for 10 seconds or more, the ecu resets its self to your mods?

Hope this helps matey ;)
 

antgtir

New Member
Dooie Pop Pop said:
:focus:

iv split the aerodynamics thread into tuning:-D
Good call, finally though some good conversation about the R:lol:

Keep it going guys, however i dont see the point in heating the argument;-)

Ant.
 
J

jpward

Guest
andygtir said:
loss of back pressure = loss of torque perhaps
Less back pressure should see slightly lower torque and hence why you seam to loose power if you have a broken exhaust due to slower gas flow but the goose flows well in general and it would not be as responsive in my book if the torque was down but maybe the other b box was best at both flow and back pressure!
 

rayman75

New Member
i thought you needed a bit of back pressure on N/A cars but not turboed cars, thats why people fit 3"elbows, downpipes etc and get a noticeable torque increase. a more free're flowing exhaust will be better for a turbo car wouldnt it?

i dunno its all getting abit confusing:?
 
J

jpward

Guest
rayman75 said:
i thought you needed a bit of back pressure on N/A cars but not turboed cars, thats why people fit 3"elbows, downpipes etc and get a noticeable torque increase. a more free're flowing exhaust will be better for a turbo car wouldnt it?

i dunno its all getting abit confusing:?
True it would be but, spool up is a little slower with a larger pipe as the Scavenge effect is reduced and so is velocity of the gasses which helps to keep the turbo spinning and this may be where the better torque is coming from but also consider that the original pipes may actually be restrictive like the Manifold and elbow which make sharp turns and this hampers flow and doesnt help the back pressure either!!
 

CruiseGTi-R

Member
AJ4 said:
so basically your a roofer ? :lol:

If you insist on willy waving, I spent 6 years at the Royal Aircraft Establishment in Farnborough working in flight research and development, all my professional qualifications ( 4 years ) are in Aerospace Studies and Avionics, and I model airflow over fixed structures in great detail mathematically and in wind tunnels. You could say I am more than familiar with moving objects through an airflow and how it relates to the physical forces involved ;). I would say I'm reasonably qualified to comment on the subject because its exactly what I've done for a job all my life, not just a general degree in 'engineering'.

I currently work as a consultant spacecraft payload engineer for the space industry which requires a very strong physics background.

I'm not sure exactly how being a roofer makes you an expert on airflow anyway, I can only assume so the tiles don't blow off the roof ? :lol:

I don't answer posts about suspension, handling, brakes or transmissions because thats not my field and I'm not experienced or qualified enough to do so. Fortunately, for electronics and aerodynamics I am ;)

:thumbsup:

Put that in your (BEng Hons) pipe and smoke it ! :lol::lol::lol:
Roofer :roll: .

Thanks :cry: .

General Degree in engineering? It was a degree in Structural Engineering. Thats why I'm a Structural Engineer.

Take a look at the Emirates (Arsenal) Stadium Roof. Its one of mine, not a roofer in sight, just seven years of structural design and analysis.

Doesn't matter, nevermind.
 

CruiseGTi-R

Member
Goose still useless.

Got wideband boss fitted today too, so can have afr feed.

With a bit of luck it'll be less than 10.5:1 everywhere and I can creep the boost up.
 
Last edited:

MarkTurbo

Well-Known Member
I cant see the mongoose being more restrictive than the system that was on there, especially as it had the cat in it still :? What was the bore size of the old system?

And by the way i've got a 30m (in armbands8) ) swimming certificate, so any technical questions feel free to ask :lol:
 

CruiseGTi-R

Member
lol.

It was almost identical to goose - 2.5inch throughout, but with oe cat, and a tanabe back box rather than the normal goose tip.

I'm hoping its just ecu being funny and takes getting used to (**** knows).

I think it might just be that for the relatively low power my R is pushing out (say 280bhp) that a bit more restriction gave it a little more top end kick.

I reckon that more boost/power and the less restrictive goose will come into its own.
 

MarkTurbo

Well-Known Member
CruiseGTi-R said:
I think it might just be that for the relatively low power my R is pushing out (say 280bhp) that a bit more restriction gave it a little more top end kick.
I cant see that personally :? More restriction would make it worse. When i put my mongoose on i instantly noticed that it would rev a lot more freely to the redline where as before it felt like it was holding back over 5500 rpm, and that was running standard boost ;-)
 

CruiseGTi-R

Member
It does rev better, gotta say.

Its really on at the end of fourth and fifth, say flooring it at 80mph in fifth, it won't pick up quite as well.

I'll root around. Maybe a tiny boost leak or it might just get better as it all beds in (bit hopeful).

I didn't have that earth strap on the exhaust either, thats now back on, never know.
 
A

AJ4

Guest
what kind of fuel control do you have ?

its possibly that now your exhaust is flowing better, your using a different load cell on the map but its just not tuned quite right for that load ?
 
Top