p.s. I was referring of the ''secret test'' areodynamist of 40 yrs ago if a current aerodynamist helped on the build he screwed up also.
The aerodynamicist 40 years ago (Gary Romberg) is the same aerodynamicist that currently works at AeroDyn & A2 as a technical director and was present during the full-scale test. He
didn't help build the car nor did he know the car was even being built so he could offer advice along the way or asked any questions from the individual during the building process of the car. We got a call one day from Mr. Beineke saying that he had built a ’71 Daytona and wanted to test it in the wind tunnel and since Mr. Romberg works here he got to see a car he tested while working at Chrysler 40 years ago as a full scale version. At the point Romberg took his first look at the car upon arrival and then said it was in the wrong configuration to be able to make front downforce. I have permission from the customer to talk about the front air-dam and the configurations. Mr. Beineke did see in the report that they were using a larger air-dam on the racecars. Beineke also said he had put a production air-dam on because his other wing car (with more body rake) felt “planted” at around 125mph so he didn’t think the ‘71 would need the added size. He knew once he was in the wind tunnel he could see for himself if it needed the larger air-dam or not and pre-built a larger air-dam to test. Romberg said that it was not only the size, but the air-dam on the racecars were moved forward towards the nose to add more downforce. See picture for air-dam size, stock vs. racecar version.
I don’t mean ignorant with disrespect. The definition of ignorance is -
the lack of knowledge in general, or in relation to a particular subject; the state of being uneducated or uninformed. I’m guessing you have not done wind tunnel work or you might understand how much data could be generated with months of testing, so I just meant you were uniformed on the subject if you think that someone without aero training could just pick up a report and build something to the best configuration for Maxton. Aerodynamics is a very complicated subject.
That's why LSR racers know to put air dams on their cars.
I will also be as bold to say that there are many landspeed racers that have NO idea what kind of lift or downforce numbers their cars make. Just adding a valiance (air dam) is NOT the answer to solving front lift. As a matter of fact, the larger air-dam on the ’71 Daytona still had a front lift problem and it was only when we moved it forward towards the nose that it made front downforce (as in June picture). I have seen a front valiance hurt a cars performance and I have seen a valiance in the wrong location hurt a cars performance. So, to just say adding an air-dam is best is not entirely correct.
You are right that aerodynamicist were ignorant back then because aero was a newer subject for racing, and that is why you see open wheel racecars evolve from what they started testing in the 70’s to the F1 cars of today. Because they started using wind tunnels and were able to develop the cars instead of guess. But you also have to remember that back in the 70’s NASCAR was still racing stock cars. If you want to put blame on someone for a production car creating lift (even cars of today) it is the styling department, not the aero department. This is from Gary Eaker (Head aerodynamicist of GM) and Gary Romberg (head aerodynamicist of Chrysler) “When you have 400 people in styling and 4 people in the aero department, you can bet that styling won almost every time.” The Super Bird and Dayton got a thumbs down from styling but was very good from an aerodynamic standpoint in that period in time and this made the aero dept smile.
