WRC Testing

[Sulland]

Read on twitter that Ogier felt the Fiesta chassis was too soft. I feel that has always been the case, compared to Polo and DS3.

[Lundefaret]

Interesting with very different philosophies regarding the chassis in the 17 cars.
- Volkswagen and Citroën most similar, with Citroën the most extreme in regards to the ratio between longditudal and transversal body movement (weight transfer.)
- Ford sits more down on all four wheels (like the RX car).
- Hyundai somewhere in between.
- Toyota on gravel not totally unlike Ford in philosophy.

Most downforce-fucussed seems to bee Ford and Toyota
Citroën also working a lot on aerodynamics, but also drag focused (maybe because of frontal area), and not that focused on keeping the underfloor parallel to the ground (at least not on gravel).
Toyota very focussed on low ride hight, but have done some compromises on gravel.

Some clever guys working on these cars

[skarderud]

Quite interesting that the "drag" behind the car has 3x more resistance than the displacement of the frontareal. So to awoid turbulance and drageffect is more important to go fast than the displacement of the frontarea. How faster you drive, how better it be seen.

Sent fra min XP7700 via Tapatalk

[GigiGalliNo1]

AS

[EightGear]

It is actually quite weird to see Ogier driving a Fiesta. It seems very surreal, but I like it.

[Lundefaret]

Quite interesting that the "drag" behind the car has 3x more resistance than the displacement of the frontareal. So to awoid turbulance and drageffect is more important to go fast than the displacement of the frontarea. How faster you drive, how better it be seen.

Sent fra min XP7700 via Tapatalk

That is not correct - or a misunderstanding.

Frontal area is the nr1 factor when it comes to aerodynamics, and the most important factor when it comes to drag (or air resistance in if you will.)

Example: A man (person) has about the same drag coefficient as a skyskraper (ex the Empire State Building), but drag is off course completely different because of the enormous difference in frontal area

[Mirek]

I think he meant it different way. Large majority of drag is created at the rear of the car (better to say behind the car) not at the front. The car with vertical front face but long flowing rear-end has way less drag than a one with sharp front end but vertical rear (considering same projected normal area).

[A FONDO]

AS

Pic of the week.

[skarderud]

I think he meant it different way. Large majority of drag is created at the rear of the car (better to say behind the car) not at the front. The car with vertical front face but long flowing rear-end has way less drag than a one with sharp front end but vertical rear (considering same projected normal area).

Yes, bad english

Example, bobsleigh as i know quite much how works, the drag effect behind the sled gives 3x the resistance that what the front do. Thats the reason a big wing, or a "high downforce" front can do more bad than good. Of course, sideways in the forrest is also a factor.
I'm a cabinetmaker and "has been" bobsledder, not wery familiar to technical english, so i have a little problem to write what i have in my head

Sent fra min XP7700 via Tapatalk

[Rally Power]

Quick video from Mark James of the Ogier M-Sport test - https://twitter.com/markrally/status/802143447696211968

Sooo slow?!? It understeers like a pig! No way Ogier will sign for that piece of junk!!! What...not a Toyota?!? Ooooooh, it's a Ford...Yeah, it looks really great! Go for it Ogier!!!