GT5 Latest News & Discussion
- Thread starter gamelle71
- 76,879 comments
- 9,397,666 views
- 10,403
- GTP_Spag69
- spagetti69
Wings don't produce drag?
- 794
- RaceVW14 GTP_TheMoose for GT5P
- Who needs a xbox? I gotta PS3!
Yes really!
Yes wings produce drag but if you just want straight line speed you put just enough wing in to keep the car on the ground & really reduce drag.
The tires however have the aerodynamics of a brick, that's why the rules will not allow them to be covered by body work.
The main reason for all the fancy aerodynamic bits on a front wing is to direct air around the front tires.
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
Open wheels create tremendous drag. But in the case of an F1 car reaching 250 mph, it was the removal of the drag enducing rear wing which made it
Edit. http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/21/honda-f1-sets-land-speed-records-at-bonneville/
All week long, the Honda Racing F1 team has been out at the Bonneville Salt Flats pursuing a lofty goal: setting a new Formula 1 car land speed record over the Bonneville flying mile with an average speed of 400 kph. Honda simply called the mission the Bonneville 400.
The instrument being used to make the attempt was a V10-powered Honda 007. For the runs out on the salt, the car was outfitted with an upright rear fin instead of the standard wing, and also employed the use of a parachute to help slow itself at the completion of each attempt. Driver Alan van der Mewe was behind the wheel for all the early-morning record runs, and through the course of the week, Alan, the team, and the car have broken F1 class records three times.
During today's final set of attempts, the Honda produced two land speed records for Formula 1 cars. Over the Bonneville flying mile, the car hit an average speed of 397.360kph (246.908mph). The second record set was over the flying kilometer, where it averaged 397.481kph (246.983mph).
The magic 400 kph average remained out of reach, though earlier this week, the car did hit 400.454 kph on one pass of the measured mile. It wasn't able to match the feat on the return trip, unfortunately.
Last edited:
- 2,799
- Porto
- Burnout_PT
If wings didn't produce drag, they wouldn't have invented the famous F-Duct. It exists to reduce rear wing drag on straights where it's not needed.
But yes, tires also, or even more than wing.
But yes, tires also, or even more than wing.
- 1,127
- New Orleans, LA
- GasolineJunkee; babygangstayurd
- 86,165
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Amusingly, someone with 1 post to their name has reported a post in this thread for "trying to be a smart ass but he is wrong", thus managing to draw moderator attention for his standard of English and his abuse of the Report button (being wrong is not against the AUP, and the Report button is for AUP violations only).
Which post? Why... Scaff's. Thus also "trying to be a smart ass but he is wrong".
To run through the maths, with all wings set to stall, a closed wheel sports prototype car has a drag coefficient of about 0.5 and an F1 car has a drag coefficient of about 1.0. For comparison, this would mean that, if the F1 car were capable of 246.983mph and all other factors were kept the same, the closed wheel version would be capable of 350mph (ballpark - I had to fudge a number with assumptions) - which is the equivalent of about a 185% gain in power . Wings set to typical F1 values (about 5g at that kind of speed), on the other hand, are equivalent to about a 5% loss in power compared to the wingless version, or a top speed of about 240mph for that F1 car.
There's a caveat here. First, my numbers aren't precise - but as you can see by the difference in magnitudes, it doesn't matter. Covering the wheels with aerodynamic bodywork is nearly 40 times more effective than running a flat wing at increasing straightline speed. Second, the Honda ran not with a flat wing, but with no rear wing at all - just a lateral stabilising fin - which would also have reduced aerodynamic drag caused by a honking great wing assembly presenting itself to the air. But even then, you're looking at an upper bound of a 10% increase in speed (or the equivalence of 33% gain in power) - which is far better than a flat wing but still dwarfed by the effects of covering up those wheels.
Being open wheel is by far the biggest hindrance to an F1 car's top speed, not the amount of wing they run. After all, the WM Peugeot P88 beat Honda's F1 effort 20 years previously, with 100hp less, during a race with its peers on Hunaudieres...
Which post? Why... Scaff's. Thus also "trying to be a smart ass but he is wrong".
To run through the maths, with all wings set to stall, a closed wheel sports prototype car has a drag coefficient of about 0.5 and an F1 car has a drag coefficient of about 1.0. For comparison, this would mean that, if the F1 car were capable of 246.983mph and all other factors were kept the same, the closed wheel version would be capable of 350mph (ballpark - I had to fudge a number with assumptions) - which is the equivalent of about a 185% gain in power . Wings set to typical F1 values (about 5g at that kind of speed), on the other hand, are equivalent to about a 5% loss in power compared to the wingless version, or a top speed of about 240mph for that F1 car.
There's a caveat here. First, my numbers aren't precise - but as you can see by the difference in magnitudes, it doesn't matter. Covering the wheels with aerodynamic bodywork is nearly 40 times more effective than running a flat wing at increasing straightline speed. Second, the Honda ran not with a flat wing, but with no rear wing at all - just a lateral stabilising fin - which would also have reduced aerodynamic drag caused by a honking great wing assembly presenting itself to the air. But even then, you're looking at an upper bound of a 10% increase in speed (or the equivalence of 33% gain in power) - which is far better than a flat wing but still dwarfed by the effects of covering up those wheels.
Being open wheel is by far the biggest hindrance to an F1 car's top speed, not the amount of wing they run. After all, the WM Peugeot P88 beat Honda's F1 effort 20 years previously, with 100hp less, during a race with its peers on Hunaudieres...
SuperShouden
(Banned)
- 7,542
- SuperShouden
yeah, wouldn't the fact that the wheel is moving also disrupt aerodynamics? I mean, the movement of the will would change the air flow dramatically, and one would assume that an open wheel racer in motion would have worse aerodynamics than an stationary one.
At the moment I can't find it. However if there would be 20+ countries I couldn't possibly imagine they're getting all those variations in if they include more variations of the 'Ring and Le Mans than they've shown + London long in both directions (confirmed) + Eiger long in both directions + both R5's in both directions etc.. However your point is valid and however unlikely I may consider it pd can always mean countries with locations.
D.Pritchard
Premium
- 171
- DannyPritchard
Thank you, I would also like to see that.
Why do you and some others have to act like everyone who doesn't live on Gt Planet is an imbecile? I have a life out side the joys of Gran Turismo. I own my home, ie spend time on upkeep, I also run my own small construction business, and have other interests, rebuilding my back yard, and working on my '72 VW bus. I asked a simple, straight forward question and you felt the need to disrespect me. PLEASE!!! Do as Patrick Swazye said in the movie "Road House" and BE NICE! Thank You
- 2,980
- The Ramapo Mountains
- jjaisli
I don't disagree on any particular point. And I can only laugh that somebody would 'report' Scaff's post. But this discussion began with reference to comments from Seb Vettel that cars in the game were reaching 400-kmh. Somebody said that was F1 car speed. And somebody else mentioned F1 cars don't go that fast.
As F1 cars, like any racing cars, are built to very specific rules and regulations, they are not permitted to run with fairings or covering on their wheels. They could, without breaking the rules, run with a rear wing that would create very little downforce but at the same time result in both minimal drag and little disruption to it's air-flow. And with the proper gearing and enough room, reach speeds close to 400 kmh. So if Circuit de La Sarthe is in the game, sans chicanes, I would think a modern F1 car, properly modeled could likely reach speeds close to 400 kmh and maintain an element of realism with their real world counter part. That's more or less my point both here and in my post above.
Last edited:
- 1,127
- New Orleans, LA
- GasolineJunkee; babygangstayurd
Oh, I was hoping that I missed something. It's hard to know what PD means by anything. They are so vague. But I really don't think they mean countries, either. It could definitely mean actual track locations like you implied, and they could release it with 60 locations and technically it would fit the 20+.
As discussed above,
It just seems wierd that they showed all those tracks at the end of Prologue for those not to be in. In that case, there would be much more than 20 "track locations"
I really think PD likes having everyone speculate.
- 598
- GTP_2299
- 996
- Texas
- GTP_Rees
Hmmmmm.......
👍👍+1 everyone knows everything.....and yet,....nothing at all.
I really think PD likes having everyone speculate.
DingDingDing....we have a winner.
SuperCobraJet
(Banned)
- 2,472
- Virginia USA
- SuperCobraJet1
Sorry but I've written it like dozen times and still people seem to get thing mixed up. Not because they aren't GTplanet regulars but because they actually are. We are just as ambiguous as pd at times so that doesn't help.
- 1,175
Thanks for the calculations Famine, showing that an F1 car with closed wheels would in fact go beyond 500km/h, thus confirming that "fixing" snowgt's original post, where he estimated wing adjustment would get an F1 "at least close" to 400hm/h was, in fact, as many could clearly see, unnecessary.
- 10,403
- GTP_Spag69
- spagetti69
So if I take my wheels off I go faster lol.
- 737
- RaLpH89 / GTP_RaLpH89
It might. Less drag = more speed, right?
SuperCobraJet
(Banned)
- 2,472
- Virginia USA
- SuperCobraJet1
Thou shalt not make improper use of the "report button".
No.......................... I think it was something else.
If you have your wings set for uplift as opposed to downforce and a Turbo Fan engine, I think its possible.
Last edited:
SuperCobraJet
(Banned)
- 2,472
- Virginia USA
- SuperCobraJet1
- 9,589
- GTP_DelphicR
- Esoterik1
Okay, I'll have an attempt to start a new debate:
How do you think the inclusion of reverse lights fundamentally changes the way you experience GT5 compared to previous editions?
I will be able to clearly see when punters are trying to "reverse me off the track", just after spinning on the first corner, 5 cars ahead of me..... subsequently taking out said 5 cars.
Or, it could help when (using cockpit view) you need to reverse on a night track. You can't see much out of the back of some of those cars in prologue. Add darkness to the equation, and those little "night-brightening" reverse lights don't seem like such a silly idea.
Or, they could be completely useless.
All depends really. They could be candles in jam jars.
SuperShouden
(Banned)
- 7,542
- SuperShouden
I've noticed that cars bounce more accurately in GT5. Now there's some residual bounce in the shocks instead of the stiff shocks from GT4.
- 314
- alexpitika
- Sasuki84
Similar threads
