The first ACTUAL pic of the DeltaWing

I bet they could make a wider front clip for road courses only. And for ovals reconfigure the car into a slim front end.

The purpose of efficiency is more for promotional value more than genuine contribution to green movements. That's only my opinion.

You know those CSX freight train commercials you see all over television now? Claims of moving 1 ton over 400+ miles per gallon of diesel fuel? I'm pretty sure that is pretty optimistic even at peak efficiency. That is, not taking into account starting off, getting up to speed, crosswind resistance, blah blah, etc etc. It's a great attention getter - but not reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Listen guys, for the record, I am an engineer. I don't want to tell you exactly what I do, but it is related to the race industry. I do know some things about vehicle dynamics. Not as much as Bowlby, but some. Bowlby has designed great cars before, but to hold him up as someone who can not ever make a mistake, even big mistakes, is foolish.

I have never said that this design won't work. It will work as long as this new, never been tested in race conditions, very complicated, electronically controled differential steering works. All I'm saying is that VERY EXTENSIVE TESTING needs to be done on this system before I'd go staking the entire series on this thing.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

---

+1 on that. If the design goal was to set a closed course land speed record, no one would be second guessing Bowlby. There is no good data on how effective a narrow front track car with an extreme rear weight bias would be in a track racing situation. There is data that indicates the narrow front track will be a problem, so it's only reasonable to be sceptical. No one is currently using differential steering in a high speed environment, so until it is proven to work, this car is nothing more than a design exercise.

I see on AR1's home page that there are some CFD images of the Delta Wing. Are these available to the public (i.e. non subscribers)? If so, where can they be obtained? I'm interested to see what conventional RANS models make of the body shape.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken

Oh come on mark....your the guy who took a mockup from a forumfan and claimed it to be more 'realistic'

---

???? Don't recall that...but then again, unlike some, I admit I get things wrong.

It just makes me laugh that guys are judging the engineering without seeing it. I remain skeptical, but I would like to know what Bowlby did before judging him.

Back on post 219....

Did you not claim a photoshoped version of the dw created by a memeber of another forum was a more realistic interpretaion of the concept

?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken

Back on post 219....

Did you not claim a photoshoped version of the dw created by a memeber of another forum was a more realistic interpretaion of the concept

?

---

Right...well you have me on that one. My point was and is tho this guy didn't fall off the turnip truck and he is presenting us with a concept, not a done deal. I would like to see what he has planned. My comment on the photoshopped pic being more realistic is likely what might happen but, I am not so skeptical to think Bowlby's ideas WONT work, as many have asserted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chamoo

I see your point Ken. However, this is a man who penned the Lola B03/00. A man who Chip Ganassi trusted with this project.

---

And?

Colin Chapman designed the Lotus 49, 72, 79 and followed them up with the Lotus 63, 76, 80 respectively.

Jim Hall followed the 2 E/F/G with the 2H.

I could keep going and bring up Maurice Philippe, John Barnard, Nigel Bennett, Alan Jenkins, and so on, all had great designs that had flops that followed.