Your S on Track / Course
12-04-2007 | 08:08 AM
#611
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,187
Likes: 3
just thinking as an engineer, if you mount the wing farther back you get a torque downward and effectively increase the downforce on the rear axle. this would come at the expense of downforce at the front.
again, thats not experience, just thinking in terms of loads...
again, thats not experience, just thinking in terms of loads...
12-04-2007 | 11:35 AM
#613
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 48,203
Likes: 10
From: Lewisville, TX
Originally Posted by FF2Skip,Nov 30 2007, 12:59 PM
Ok. With a wing mounted rearward and beyond the "fulcrum," couldn't less angle of attack be used to generate the same amount of downforce, thereby decreasing drag?
12-06-2007 | 06:47 PM
#616
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,775
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
Originally Posted by 1AP12NV,Nov 30 2007, 10:11 AM
If anything, I've seen a tendancy for race cars to mount the rear wing as far back as possible (in some cases even farther back than the body of the car will allow).
I too wonder what the reasoning for this is. There has to be a counterpoint to the argument that you'd want the wing as close to the rear axles as possible, otherwise I'd think that you'd see every wing mounted right over the wheels.
I too wonder what the reasoning for this is. There has to be a counterpoint to the argument that you'd want the wing as close to the rear axles as possible, otherwise I'd think that you'd see every wing mounted right over the wheels.
