Actually it doesn't it the cover (the gap il 20mm and the internal flow is not compromised).wesley123 wrote:I'm interested in the front wing that hits the suspension cover as well
Actually it doesn't it the cover (the gap il 20mm and the internal flow is not compromised).wesley123 wrote:I'm interested in the front wing that hits the suspension cover as well
CAEdevice wrote:Actually it doesn't it the cover (the gap il 20mm and the internal flow is not compromised).wesley123 wrote:I'm interested in the front wing that hits the suspension cover as well
Yes, I confirm. The section is a compromise between the diffuser function, the front suspension visibility rule and the exterrnal template volume of the cooling intakes, that can't intersect the bodywork.machin wrote:CAEdevice wrote:Actually it doesn't it the cover (the gap il 20mm and the internal flow is not compromised).wesley123 wrote:I'm interested in the front wing that hits the suspension cover as well
I presume that, whilst they look like a wing assembly and suspension fairing, they are in reality so close together as to form what is in effect a front diffuser of the kind we are seeing at the back of the car (the type with the inflection in the middle)...?
Sure they will! But less lift than the original wheel arch geometryvariante wrote:Indeed a great design (finally no weirdly shaped noses!). I'm curious to see how our cars compare!
I'm also curious about the behaviour of your devices over the wheel arches...will they generate small yet lifting vortices from their leading edges? Won't they?? We'll know in a few days..
I confirm, exactly the same for me.MadMatt wrote:I tried flow management with such things on my car, but over the rear arches, and it didn't quite worked, but at the front it was pretty good!
Thanks for the comment.LVDH wrote:What I see there under the nose looks interesting, F1 style.
And what is going on with these small vortex generators on top of the cooling pods?
Any chance you can loose a few words on them?