You guys are really gonna have a hayday with this one, but I have to ask. I am begging for your patients in advance. I read in a car mag(Car & Driver, or Road & Track) that at around 160 mph the air resistance is so dense that the major danger is flight. The article also stated that to be safe over that speed, the manufacturers have to design the body to create downforce...instead of just look good. Case in point...the Ferrari F50 creates so much downforce at just 100 mph that you could turn the road upside down and the car would still stick. Having said that, why is it that we never hear of cars (normal cars that is) going end over end when they were tuned to go beyond that point but not manufactured to do so? Does anyone know if the S2K was designed with this high speed downforce? What about the tires? I've heard the car will do 160 or so, but how safe is that on the stock tires? Just some thoughts. Please don't be too cruel to me...hehe.

 

retractable wings bodykit groupbuy anyone?

 

First off to do 160mph for a good amount of time you need lots of space....with Hondas background in racing there was probably some engineering in the car to provide stability at those speeds.....but the chance of a stock S2000 reaching speeds of 160 is very slim...

scott

 

Lift is a problem at high speed but not the extent that a car would take flight (read on for circumstances). The function of aerodynamic wings and such is to apply downforce so the car becomes more controllable, predictable and remain lower to the ground to helo aerodynamicy (more speed).

This is where designing how air flows above and below the car is important. Look at the new M3 as an example:



The only problem with lift occurs at high speeds where car looses downforce... most commonly on a race circuit where cars are drafting each other at high speeds over a course with undulations in the track.

I'll edit my post with an mpeg of this when I get home.

Anyone want to add or correct, feel free... I'm often wrong!



[This message has been edited by loki (edited December 14, 2000).]

 

The stook does 18 mph/1000 rpm in 6th gear; that translates to 160 mph @ 9000 rpm. I think the speed rating on the Bridgestones is 168 mph. Am I right? I guess I'm a chicken-****. I've never been much over 100.

 

Cars DO fly at those speeds. A friend of mine had a late-80's Corvette which became airborne at 130 MPH (hit a dip, then a bump, then took off). The car was totalled. I'm sure you've all seen videos of speedboats taking flight and disintegrating when they land... an S2000 can go a he11 of a lot faster than most speedboats!

 

speedboats... heck just look on the web for videos of the Mercedes Benz LMP cars for Le Mans... last year or the year before... did'nt they flip 2 out of 3 or something like that.

 

I think the more aerodynamic your car is (especially with an undertray body) the more susceptible you are to lift when you're travelling at high speed, especially over undulating surfaces.

Here's one videoclip that illustrates this. I believe it was just a year before thisPorshce accident that both Mercedes CLK-GTR's (drool) flipped at Road Atlanta's dip.
.mpeg\"]http://www.digicomp.cc/grandtouring/movies/Porsche[1].mpeg

 

I took my S2000 over 150 ...!!
It feels very heavy ..lots of down force.
The steering is the thing you notice the
most ...and NOISE. The car will do 160
I'm sure but it's white nuckle time.
I've had the top down at over 140 also.
Be sure you have looked your car over
very close before trying this ..!!

 

If you put an airplane wing on the S2000 and sent it along its way at 160mph, then yes, it will take flight. However, while the car's shape does promote lift, it isn't enough to send it flying. The deal with the flipping Mercedes and Porsche is that while traveling along in the wake of a car ahead of them, the crested a hill and got some air caught under the nose. Since these cars have specially tuned flat bottoms way close to the ground to maximize downforce as much as the rules allow, that air didn't have anywhere to go and lifted the entire nose up. At that point, the onrushing air just grabbed the car and flipped the front up, and the rear followed. That's why on race cars of that type you'll often see smalish vanes on the sides at the front that angle up sharply - it's to keep the nose down. After the first and second flips, Mercedes messed with those to try to fix things, but obviously from the third flip, it didn't work.

At least, that's what I think is going on.