This is not from the Engineering Dept at X Factotry, but is my personal view: It is virtually impossible to have too much aero. Downforce = traction, and you can't possibly have too much traction because traction = speed.
Now it is possible to have more traction on one end of the car than the other, and that can cause problems (under- or over-steer) so balance is perhaps the most important part of the equation. However, I think when you've got too much traction at one end, the solution is to increase the other end, not decrease the first.
So, as we have arguments at the shop, they find me boringly on the side of more and more aero on both ends. F-1 cars would be winged wonders absent restrictive rules. As is, they have enough areo that, if you put a corkscrew in the road, you could drive them upside down. I want our cars that planted.
And don't give me the "rough track" argument. In Italy in '05, with the roughest track at worlds for a long time, front wings sprouted all over and rear wings all had full gurney. On a rough track, more aero = stability = speed. On a smooth track, more aero = traction = speed.
Now back to your regularly scheduled progrmming...
|