USA FERRARI F40

AGAIN
I asked nicely. You ignored request. I spent time on far more important stuff than this. I'm not kidding. Answer one question as posted. I was civil.

You brought up patients, not me.

Either you have character or compassion, or not. I'll post a picture of the child's body before I will spend another minute without your explicit comment on this.

Excuse me again, but I have another one to deal with.

If you can't do this request, post that too, don't ignore it.

Have respect for the dead, at least.

 

I have less an issue with paramount than you do with MacClaren. What I meant to say is you are compromised. A poor excuse for, well, anything.

 

LMAO!!!

 

this is getting pretty rediculous for two grown (?) men to be fighting about...

Can't we all just get along and enjoy our passion for Ferrari?

 

There's clearly a long history between Joe and Lee, but for a few brief posts there was actually some dialogue. Predictably not long enough .

Unfortunately Joe chose to make a slight dig by Lee into a great big hole and now Lee is calling out the earth movers to make the hole even bigger. Lee did mention patients first, but I thought it was rude/insulting to imply that Lee was not taking care of his professional responsibilities. When, how long and how often someone posts is their business.

While an apology to Lee is in order, I think it would be better to not escalate the situation by requiring it and let whether or not Joe apologizes speak for itself.

 

Lee,

I wouldn't let any tired old "your patients are waiting" lines bother you...this is old material from Joe and he tried that BS last year with me...unsurprising lack of originality, but consider the source.

Fact is, you have touched lives in a more meaningful way than Joe ever could or will...maybe thats the issue.

 

All photos and text copyright the original author/photographer
Taken from Supercars Ferrari F40
Took photos with iPhone. Buy the book if one needs more detail.
Questions extant:
Did Materazzi spec wing design or was he involved directly (quoted as '30-'40's pre-specc'd Wortmann wing)?
Or did PF/Ramaciotti (Fioravanti actually gave intro at F40 debut) design wing using Eppler computer principles(individualized wing design to specific purpose) and wind tunnel development?
No other question relevant until this answered. Need more than an EM. Tons of references quoted on this point by me, Jim G. JS has a "...Materazzi told me recently" and is waiting on an EM from him. Ah. What?
Yin:1st mentioned: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138438791&postcount=16 Right about time I became aware of JS, white shoes, white belt, plaid pants, and Raybans all.

This wasn't much of a discussion either, though seemed like an eternity. Evidence posted from multiple sources, and met with further questions without response to evidence except "Ah".
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Great info, thanks for sharing. I'm amazed how much aero work went into this car even "back then".

 

What is amazing is that result variance was quite high from test to test. I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that yet.

 

Very nice picture with great color considering the age of the image, Joe!
There is another b&w picture from earlier when the car is still covered. Just has the cleaning lady in front of the F40 working a broom. Might have been in the Car & Driver coverage of the introduction.
CH

 

The pictures in post 2985, though, are definitely taken in the Pininfarina windtunnel.

Would be curious to see the contents of the ROMBO article and the reasons behind his bitter divorce from Ferrari.

 

Yes they are.

Speaking of which there's an interesting article in Forza about same.

At the end they cite down force numbers for several road going Ferrari's.

Bill especially may want to read it.

Think about the F 430's numbers which was developed years after the Enzo.

 

The tunnel photos are not CRF. PF had the electronics then (mid-late 80's), not CRF.
I have only seen photos in the PF tunnel, and the quotes below from Ramaciotti et al discussing the requirements and results of the wing design mods (by definition, as Jim and I have repeatedly pointed out, NOT a Wortman wing, which is a pre-set wing profile, unaltered by testing data) bears the PF tunnel testing out.

Materazzi can say anything, he's a swell guy for all I know or care. He isn't an aerodynamicist, and that isn't a Wortman wing. Period. Not my definition, see NASA citations cited previously. If Sg. Materazzi insists it is a Wortmann wing profile, it would be very relevant to know the design number used, so we can handily compare it's plan form to an actual F40 production wing plan form. Details to back up assertions. Here's a link to design photos of Wortmann and Eppler http://www.ae.uiuc.edu/m-selig/ads/coord_database.html Only about 100 each, there's more, but it's a start. It'll be great to know which specific Wortmann FX he directly specified.

More NACA ducts mean more function? Seriously? Actually, an aerodynamicist believes the least ducts possible are optimal, nothing more. That's why air dams and fences are used, to manage flow without slowing it and breaking it up. Getting air out cleanly was biggest issue, and that didn't involve NACA ducts (see rear window, rear deck under spoiler, side vents).

This is quite tedious arguing photographic, NASA papers on aerodynamics, and pointless magazine headlines that declare whatever. The technical evidence > anecdotes. Ask Dick Merritt, Marcel Massini, or anyone else with direct firsthand knowledge. I would think Chuck Jordan may have pretty direct info independent of Sg. Materazzi. I haven't spoken with him in quite some time, and can't spare the time now, but perhaps Jim G, or one of the rest of us could contact him. He is still in RSF IIRC, I don't believe the house got hit by the fires a year or 2 back.

Piero Lardi wasn't fathered by Ferrari initially either by report.

Materazzi's stories are interesting. If he claims he is Piero's father though, I hope he didn't put him in a wind tunnel I know he didn't father the intarweb. Al Gore did

I've posted a brochure of Fiat Centro Stile tunnel from 1988. One would think that the F40 would feature prominently in a nice brochure touting their work. A 4-5yo 312 not state of the art in '88. Or at least a mention, since the brochure came out about the same time. (Doesn't everyone have a wind tunnel brochure? )

There is one photo of the F40 in the electromagnetic chamber/sound chamber in this CRF brochure. Zero mention of developmental work done there on it despite mentioning Lancia Thema. Guess Thema had more cachet? http://www.fiatgroup.com/en-us/innovation/crf/Documents/CRF_EN.pdf


11 days without a post in this thread. Wow.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Forgot one thing. In spec page of Fiat wind tunnel brochure, both the max wind speed (200kph) available and downforce measurements possible are inadequate for the Vmax and downforce/lift generated by the F40, or anything else quick/generative of huge downforces, for that matter. -200kg->+200kg most coordinates, only -100->+100kg lift per corner. Not enough.

As we all have seen, they did not do scale replicas (lower speed tunnels can be used on them).

They also noted that they use an analog-digital conversion. The notes by Ramaciotti/PF mention digital analysis, something not available at the CRF/FCS tunnel by their admission. Hard to put oneself forward as an expert with BS in the brochure, and this is a really nice brief on the facility. Great to go with a development RFQ.

The PdF on FCS is a nice brief, and their patents are broad. The new FCS is far more state of the art, but it is 20 years newer. And not in Mirafiori