Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Special Interests and Events
Open Track Racing
My new heat extractor hood
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mu22stang" data-source="post: 11601400" data-attributes="member: 81298"><p>I see it two ways, and with my lack of aerodynamic knowledge, I can't say which is better or if my hypotheses are even right. Either:</p><p></p><p>The smooth, low pressure, laminar flow of the boundary layer flowing over the recessed hood vent that "sucks" the pressure from the engine bay is more efficient...</p><p></p><p>or...</p><p></p><p>The large hole punched in the air by the gurney, despite the disruption of the smooth, laminar flow of the boundary layer, is more efficient. </p><p></p><p>The Tiger racing hood has a <em>slight</em> raised lip around the entire border of the recessed vents. Per the information I've followed from Carlos and his conversations with Paul Brown, turbulent flow over this area may not be good for extraction. Hence the 40* louvers added to Carlos' design, similar to Tiger Racing's unit. It's interesting that the Tiger racing hood's leading opening is similar in size to the stock Terminator hood vent opening. All others are narrower. I’m not necessarily concerned about the drag penalty, especially if cooling is improved. </p><p></p><p>I’m going to try some other designs this weekend: A slotted gurney (drilled holes), a rounded gurney (zero height at the edge, 1/2” to 1” at the center), a ramped face (concave) and a curved face (convex). I’ll try to get my wife to take some video with the iphone.</p><p></p><p>I suppose the only way to test the cooling improvement is to compare ECT's, but my next track day probably won't be until the beginning of May.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mu22stang, post: 11601400, member: 81298"] I see it two ways, and with my lack of aerodynamic knowledge, I can't say which is better or if my hypotheses are even right. Either: The smooth, low pressure, laminar flow of the boundary layer flowing over the recessed hood vent that "sucks" the pressure from the engine bay is more efficient... or... The large hole punched in the air by the gurney, despite the disruption of the smooth, laminar flow of the boundary layer, is more efficient. The Tiger racing hood has a [I]slight[/I] raised lip around the entire border of the recessed vents. Per the information I've followed from Carlos and his conversations with Paul Brown, turbulent flow over this area may not be good for extraction. Hence the 40* louvers added to Carlos' design, similar to Tiger Racing's unit. It's interesting that the Tiger racing hood's leading opening is similar in size to the stock Terminator hood vent opening. All others are narrower. I’m not necessarily concerned about the drag penalty, especially if cooling is improved. I’m going to try some other designs this weekend: A slotted gurney (drilled holes), a rounded gurney (zero height at the edge, 1/2” to 1” at the center), a ramped face (concave) and a curved face (convex). I’ll try to get my wife to take some video with the iphone. I suppose the only way to test the cooling improvement is to compare ECT's, but my next track day probably won't be until the beginning of May. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Special Interests and Events
Open Track Racing
My new heat extractor hood
Top