Having seen the 348 top speed thread, I was wondering what the 348 generates at the front and rear i.e. how much downforce or lift at 100mph? This could have a bearing on the experiences reported in the other thread i.e. fear of pushing the 348. Perhaps it generates lift? Most cars do. Jas
I'd like to know the answer also and would a front wing/lip help any as there are a few available, i fitted rs front splitters to my 993 and it made a noticable difference at speed, as i mentioned in the speed thread, my Testarossa was really stable (i know it's bigger etc) but the shape is really a scaled up 348.
I spoke to a fellow 348 owner in the UK a couple of years back. Their car (like mine) had originally come from Germany. Apparently the original owner was getting lift on the Autobahn over 150mph and had it sent back to the factory to have the suspension lowered. I think, but I can't be sure, that it had an alteration to the front spoiler as well. Jonathan
From memory, and this is 2-3 years ago, I saw downforce/lift data on a number of cars. I recall that normal 911's generate significant lift, as do the *vast* majority of cars. The Lotus Elise S1 generates a little downforce at the front and a little lift at the rear. The Lotus Exige generates a fair amount of downforce front and rear, but with the penalty of high drag. Obviously even a little downforce is *vastly* preferable to a typical car's high lift characteristics. The Lotus Elise S2 generates a little downforce front and rear. Some Ferraris generate some downforce, but sadly I can remember no details. Cars like Radicals generate high downforce, but then they run at impractical track only ride-heights. Jas
I think I have something here in my library that lists aero figures for the 348. Here's a picture of the car in the wind tunnel. Are those the "tubie" exhausts I've heard about?? They seem kind of long... Image Unavailable, Please Login
308/328/348/355 etc all produce lift to some degree at both ends. All these cars basically have flat bottoms, and curved tops. As long as air can get under the car, you have a shockingly bad aerofoil...but a wing none-the-less. How to help - larger front spoiler, lower suspension, big rear wing, and believe it or not - if you have a GTS....take the roof off, it spoils the air flow increase drag, slows you down but will make you more stable in most situations. Later "modern" cars had venturi or tunnels underneath - huge improvement...and so as Colin Chapman discoverd....(maybe he just invented/guessed it and Mario discovered).....damn thing just went round corners fast, less drag, more stable and went like stink....until a skirt stuck up...but thats another story. 'Fraid I still do not know the figures, but there is a neat gizzmo out there that will tell you - if you are into it. Attaches to yours springs, measures compression/extension, and transmits to a laptop....set static to zero, find a long strait bit of asphalt, go fast and see what you get to compare. They are sold by peagasus autospoprt supplies. Good Luck!
From a google site about the 360: Aerodynamic revolution lies under the car - a longitudinal channel has been added to the originally flat carbon fibre undertray, drawing air towards the raised diffuser at the tail introducing ground effects thus greatly enhance high speed stability. At 180mph, there is 180kg of downforce, roughly 4 times of the F355. One source has stated this creates more downforce than the huge-wing F50. This distribution of downforce matches exactly the front to rear weight distribution, thus contributing to a consistent handling irrespective to speed. The trade-off is quite modest - coefficient of drag increases from 0.32 to 0.335. How's this? http://www.globalcar.com/datasheet/Ferrari/1989Ferrari348tb.htm
quoted from jeff- Are those the "tubie" exhausts I've heard about?? They seem kind of long... lol, i want a those pipes too.....
This is all I could find, from Enrico Benzing's book on the 348: ".....The crossflow highlights the cleanness of the slipstream, prime index of low air drag values. In addition to the reduced adimensional drag coefficient, 4 points better at Cx=0.32 (only a few touches away from the threshold of Cx=0.30), the values of the lift coefficient Cz were lower, both the overall figure, with Cz=0.09 (versus the previous Cz=0.30 [on the 328]), and the split between front and rear axles, at Cz=0.03 and Cz=0.06 respectively. Given a frontal area of 1.824 sq.m (rear view mirrors included), the products equal SCx=0.58 and SCz=0.16, values absolutely untouchable for any type of high performance sedan...." Since this data isn't related in pounds of lift, I'm not sure if it will answer your question, but it would seem to indicate that the drag and lift figures were pretty respectable for the late Eighties. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Thanks guys Interesting read. So the 348 only generates very slight lift. I guess the comments in the other thread about nervousness at speed must be down to other factors then. Jas
