Aerodynamics...does it really matter in 1/64th scale?

hello G,
i can't even spell arrowdienamix... but..
i race ( bricks ) altered A-OKs..... added a windshield to a t totaller altered, not bad...
see you in the other lane... smitty

hello G,
having fallen under my thinking cap, what if... you time a car that has an easily removable wind shield, record it, remove the w/s, weigh it ,and add that weight to the w/s less car...time it, and compare! maybe try long and short tracks ?
I WOULD LIKE A COPY OF THE RESULTS of that experiment...
but i'm still gonna race "A-OKs" see you in the other lane smitty

...yea Smitty, I do recognize the irony of our 'favorite casting' having a rather non-aerodynamic shape. I guess you could say that 'style preference' and beneficial flow characteristics don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. But that is fairly typical throughout the automotive world which is why there's almost always room for improvement.

I think the biggest obstacle is the fact that aerodynamic properties are difficult(and expensive) to measure precisely. We can easily put a car on a scale to determine weight and inspect & adjust wheel/axle tension to affect rolling resistance...but let's face it, access to scale wind tunnels are hard to come by.

I think weight and axel/wheel type play a much larger role then Aerodynamics do. However, I do think it does play a role in cars which are the same type and weight. Take FTE's for example. They all have the same axel/wheel type, however, the ones that usually perform the best - are the ones which are more aerodynamic. The Ferrari 458 italia, Corvette ZR1, and the Cadillac V-16 are all very aerodynamic cars and perform the best out of all the FTE's. Put that into comparison with the slower FTEs: Off Track, Straight Pipes, Ford Anglia and Symbolic.

Granted, their are other factors, but, thats just my assessment.

Go into the Lot in the Fantasy league and filter by FTE's only, then click on the Rating button once. You'll start at the top with the cars which are generally considered "less aerodynamic" and are ones with a lower rating. Then you end with ones which are "more aerodynamic" - the faster cars.

hello G,
the A-OK that is inflight [usps] is FULL of lead, that melted the thin lead LINER i had made, lumpy windows, so i bondoed them smooth, [ i made black decal / sticker windows], i hope that and a tall induction (cut the air) may help areosomthingorever, let me know ?
you know what lane i'll be in....smitty - model40fan

please clarify ; F T E wheels are mounted on nickel plated axles, that being the advantage... thanks smitty - model40fan

hello G,
you bet, extra $ and mini wind tunnels don't mix. how about running the cars on a track running though 20' of 6" pvc pipe / tube, with a good stopping system you could run the wires through the CAPS on the ends...move the cars not the air...$$$$...
yea, over in that lane smitty - model40fan

I did a very unscientific experiment with Hot Wheels based on the Mythbusters' dimple car episode and the results were kind of surprising. However, even more surprising was the discussion that was played out in the comments, as some seemingly very smart professors discussed aerodynamics, drag and weight.

Read more here: http://www.redlinederby.com/2009/11/myt ... els-style/

But I tend to agree that axles and weight distribution play a much bigger role in whether not a car performs going downhill, especially at the 1/64 scale...but that's just based on *lots* of racing and stats you find in the fantasy league.

Go into the Lot in the Fantasy league and filter by FTE's only, then click on the Rating button once. You'll start at the top with the cars which are generally considered "less aerodynamic" and are ones with a lower rating. Then you end with ones which are "more aerodynamic" - the faster cars.

Nice observation, WorpeX.

More food for thought...Is it a coincidence that speed in mind('Ferrari' is known to be very particular w/licencing). In any case, the underlying fact that many of them have a smooth, wedge-shaped, wind cheating design may actually account for something.

hello G,
having fallen under my thinking cap, what if... you time a car that has an easily removable wind shield, record it, remove the w/s, weigh it ,and add that weight to the w/s less car...time it, and compare! maybe try long and short tracks ?
I WOULD LIKE A COPY OF THE RESULTS of that experiment...
but i'm still gonna race "A-OKs" see you in the other lane smitty

Or better yet...how about repeatedly timing a 'funny car' on long downhill runs with the body propped same car with the body closed. Depending on the length of the run, I'd be willing to bet that there's a significant time difference between the two.

I had a rather long discussion with a mattel designer. He informed me that on one of their projects, they discovered the aerodynamics behaved much more closely to fluid dynamics at the 1:64 scale.

Yes, the design does make a difference, but many of the cars are not fast enough for it to really matter.

You will benefit a lot more by reducing rolling resistance and ensuring your car rolls straight.

Just reduce the friction and you'll be better off instantly.