JDMs1eeper

***Please post back with any comments you would like good or bad***

(I re-weighed the car every time i raced it to show that it was at the same weight, Only thing i changed was what i was getting data for)

I went to the track tonight to try this deflector out and adding aerodynamic to my car. I have 92' DX hatch with only a 4-1 header, and shortshifter. it has stock everything. (I also put it on a diet) I wanted to see if this "idea" would work on even a basic stock car with slower traps and Times.. I got this data

My Runs:

#1-
(Stock Bumpers, with tools in car and spare "project" bumper laying inside teh car)

Weight- 2110lb's

60ft. 2.424
1/8 10.55
mph 66.40
1/4 16.499
mph 81.77


#2-
(Same as #1 )
Weight- 2110lb's

60ft. 2.378
1/8 10.453
mph 67.02
1/4 16.420
mph 82.59


#3-
(Deflector Front Bumper, Removed rear Bumper, Stock bumpers were laying inside the car so that their were no weight differences)

Weight- 2110lb's

60ft. 2.343
1/8 10.300
mph 67.80
1/4 16.170
mph 84.22


I got 3 consistant back to back runs and the 4th run i spun bad and missed a gear... so i couldnt use taht as my data, so i got 3 runs before i left to go meet up with my girlfriend.. I must say it helps a lot


Modified by Typesi2nv at 1:34 PM 8/23/2003

nwdave

So the #4 run is with the missed shift? I think you should take it out so it won't confuse people

Anyway, good stuff Nice ET and MPH gain. Have a pic of the bumper?

NOSpeed97

It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small number of trials unless one was an extremely consistent driver. My 2000 CX pulled 16.9, 16.6, and 16.4 with the same setup each run. My times dropped as I understood how to improve my launch that day at the track.

DCStreetHtch

i agree, you need to prove that you are an incredible consistant driver. three runs is nothing for proof, BUT, of course yes less drag and better aerodynamics help! thanx for the effort!!!!
-Bryan-

JDMs1eeper

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by delsolguy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So the #4 run is with the missed shift? I think you should take it out so it won't confuse people

Anyway, good stuff Nice ET and MPH gain. Have a pic of the bumper?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes i have a picture of the bumper and the way the car was at the track, I just need to host the pics and post them on here.

JDMs1eeper

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NOSpeed97 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small number of trials unless one was an extremely consistent driver. My 2000 CX pulled 16.9, 16.6, and 16.4 with the same setup each run. My times dropped as I understood how to improve my launch that day at the track.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not bragging... just confident taht I am consitant enough to even try this experiment. Check out the first 1/8 of the mile on the runs. then look at the last half of teh track. Consistancy helps out on the first 1/8 and is really what determains the last half of the track.

To me.. it was an improvment and worth looking like a nut at the track

JDMs1eeper

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by EGStreetHtch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i agree, you need to prove that you are an incredible consistant driver. three runs is nothing for proof, BUT, of course yes less drag and better aerodynamics help! thanx for the effort!!!!
-Bryan-</TD></TR></TABLE>

I know, I had a short time frame of when I could be at the track. lol
I had plans with my Girlfriend and to me... she comes first. but anyways. I just wanted to try it out and have some kind of data for people to look at.

The last half of the track is where i wanted you all to look at. The car was at the same weight. The first half of the track and take off were as close as you coudl expect. But i mean, yall dont have to take my word for it I'm just sharing the data I got