2500 hp 25" track width Loose Salt What could possibly go Wrong?

[Interested Observer]

Stagnation drag + Separation Drag + Wetted Area Drag = Total Aero Drag.
The hardest things for us car guys to grasp is that frontal area was not mentioned anywhere in the equation. This is why you could double the width of your tail-fin (if for some reason you wanted to)  and it will not double it's drag.

Rob,

That the frontal area is not mentioned explicitly in your equation doesn't mean frontal area has no bearing on the performance.  Your second sentence essentially says that drag is independent of the frontal area--which is obviously incorrect.
While a drag coefficient is really a fudge factor allowing useful results to be easily extracted from the characteristics of the shape and fluid properties, your expression is made up of quantities that are very hard to determine.
If you think your equation is so superior, please explain, for example, what "stagnation drag" or "separation drag" is and how to predict it.  Can you do so without involving frontal area?  (And can you do that for non-streamlined shapes?).  Your terms seem like alternate expressions for pressure drag and skin friction. 

Al's wing:  Any aero appendage is going to add drag and therefore negatively impact performance unless its effect allows the vehicle to sufficiently overcome a stability and/or traction barrier.

[robfrey]

This is a great discussion but let's not hijack this thread any further. I will start another thread in the technical discussions.

[Ron Gibson]

Al's wing:  Any aero appendage is going to add drag and therefore negatively impact performance unless its effect allows the vehicle to sufficiently overcome a stability and/or traction barrier.

Since there were numerous "haircuts", traction was always a problem.

Ron

[Dean Los Angeles]

I take it the reason for removing the wing was tire rub? I'm going to guess that will be fixed and the next run will be with the wing.

With that kind of horsepower and no traction control I would think about modifying the throttle linkage to give you more travel at the last 15% so the control is better.

Having said that, I don't see any reason NOT to run traction control with that kind of horsepower. Trying to keep the slip level within bounds is tricky at best and can quickly get away from you.

[7800ebs]

Yes..


OK.  But I believe .. injector is at full flow at 40% open..  it is being changed.  I'm thinking 2 hole hilborn.   


Who makes TC for blown hemis?   Surely you would not kill cylinders.   

[F104A]

Seems awful dangerous!

[7800ebs]

What is that?

[dw230]

Killing cylinders will lift the blower? I see that on NHRA TV all the time.

DW

[sabat]

Clutch slip?

[Dynoroom]

Pulsing the brakes is the most likely path for traction control in this case.
They also pull timing as a means of controlling power.
But if they choose to drop cylinders I'll gladly watch the show....   

[tortoise]

That the frontal area is not mentioned explicitly in your equation doesn't mean frontal area has no bearing on the performance.  Your second sentence essentially says that drag is independent of the frontal area--which is obviously incorrect.

I believe in aircraft design parlance the term "drag coefficient" is sometimes used referencing plan view area - the area as viewed from directly above, rather than from the front. This area, which on an airplane is fairly closely proportionate to the total surface area of the craft, is more useful in this context than frontal area as car guys use the term. For very clean forms, friction drag from skin surface is the largest component of drag.

Thinking about a streamliner design without referencing frontal area is a valuable mental exercise because it alerts you to the possibility that your design might be improved by packaging the necessary components in a fatter, shorter form rather than the sausage-like shape of many streamliners. The solid with the lowest surface-to-volume ratio is, after all,  the sphere. The long wheelbase desired for stability can be achieved with a super-skinny tube a la Costella's creations.

[Dynoroom]

I believe in aircraft design parlance the term "drag coefficient" is sometimes used referencing plan view area - the area as viewed from directly above, rather than from the front. This area, which on an airplane is fairly closely proportionate to the total surface area of the craft, is more useful in this context than frontal area as car guys use the term. For very clean forms, friction drag from skin surface is the largest component of drag.

Thinking about a streamliner design without referencing frontal area is a valuable mental exercise because it alerts you to the possibility that your design might be improved by packaging the necessary components in a fatter, shorter form rather than the sausage-like shape of many streamliners. The solid with the lowest surface-to-volume ratio is, after all,  the sphere. The long wheelbase desired for stability can be achieved with a super-skinny tube a la Costella's creations.[/quote]

You mean those super small frontal area cars he builds....   

[7800ebs]

The answer is so easy. ...

I'll build the next engine..

Sure fire way to go slower...

No need to do anything bit tune the radio

What channel is Ozzie ..  

Or is it Sammy Hagar. .. I can't drive 55

We don't need no stinking traction  control

[7800ebs]

Oh so my ... car is a sausage...

Big Fat one...

[7800ebs]

Hey Dan ... get over to Pomona. me and Jackson are working on a funny car

You too mike

Speaking of traction control. if I'm a clutch guy/ homeless guy(G man joke)

I'm sure I will learn something..  no laughing though..