*Correction* Dodge Charger Daytona 1969 Aerodynamics
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 พ.ค. 2024
- Is the Dodge Charger Daytona 1969 Aerodynamic? What is its drag coefficient and lift coefficient?
Find out in this CFD simulation with OpenFOAM!
Want to learn OpenFOAM? Take our course: premieraerodynamics.com/Courses/
If you want to help support us to make these educational videos, you can here on Patreon: / premier_aerodynamics
Check out The Atmosphere Hawk to make your aerodynamic experiments 2 to 4% more accurate: premieraerodynamics.com/Atmos...
#Aerodynamics #CFD #OpenFOAM #ChargerAerodynamics #DodgeCharer #DodgeChargerDaytona #ChargerAerodynamics #DodyChargerDaytonaAerodynamics #DodgeChargerAerodynamics #carAerodynamics #CarCFD - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Charger Daytona is surprisingly well done aerodynamically, especially for the time period.
It was done by guys from a ballistic missile division of Chrysler
Yeah, there were a few innovative add ons.
@@TinyBearTimi was just about to comment that lol
Car companies like Ford or Ferrari did this with their race cars
That's how they did 200 mph in 1970
Fascinating. Really does show why the aero cars dominated stock car racing for that brief period before they were banned.
It is very interesting.
They weren’t exactly banned, it was more of a nerf, they were hindered as well as the other aero cars from ford and Chevy, but Chrysler received cubic inch limits down to the 305ci on their winged warriors which essentially made them useless
NASCAR had and still has a habit of finding ways to ruin things that innovate
@@Leatherface123.It's interesting how these days, you can get pretty much as much downforce as that big wing with just a small lip at the rear.
@@Leatherface123. ALL aero cars, Talladega, Cyclone Spoiler, Superbird, Daytona and Charger 500 were all limited to 305 CID.
The aero cars were not banned. They were limited to 305 CID.
Thanks for the shout!!
I drive this car quite frequently in some games and glad to see it’s frankly insane topspeed is justified by a great simulation👍
You're welcome. And thank you for telling us how to get an accurate model.
Plymouth Superbird next!
It's the same car as Daytona
@@duanJ_aka_wfoundryThere are some differences like the wings angle.
@@duanJ_aka_wfoundrythe differences between the two is enough to have a difference
And they have the vents on the wheel wells that allow trapped air to escape
@@duanJ_aka_wfoundry there are differences in the wing and body work, such as the front nosecone and the wing being lower and placed different
the reason they allowed airflow up into the wheelwells was to lower the negative pressure (caused by the fender vents) so that air could flow out the aforementioned fender vents. i forget why, but it was intentional. source: an interview with the engineers i read in a magazine from the mid-80's. it also helps with brake cooling.
That's interesting because I've tested this on other cars and I haven't found any appreciable change. Maybe it was something particular with this car.
Did this model have the holes through the top of the fenders to extract the air?
@@stephenmurphy3828 From memory, I don't think this one did.
It would be awesome to see a Toyota MR2 AW11 from 1985, especially cause the engine is in the middle, and it would be quite interesting to see how well the air from under the car would cool the engine, by pushing it upwards and out of the grill vents.
I told ya! Cool to see how big a difference those little changes make.
0.34 Is incredible! Meets the standards of modern cars, which is very cool! Those chin spoilers/air dams work way better than i expected. I always thought of them of more than an airbrake than anything else
Yep, they always seem to trick people. It is a bit delicate but essentially it is a way of controlling how much air goes under the car, and where it goes under.
@@PremierAerodynamicsFrom the same era, try a Renault 16TS (should be .32 IIRC) and then the Citroen DS21, which for a long time was the most aerodynamic production car built, basically from the late 60's through to the very late 90's there was nothing close.
The chin spoiler,... there's a little one goes under the nose of a Holden JE Camira 2.0litre, without it the car will vMax at 205 kph, with it, 215 kph. When they're right, they're really right!.
okay, if i ever find a scrap daytona with no engine i'll put a slant six and 4 speed a833 transmission and see if the gas mileage is as good as a feather duster...!
@@PiDsPagePrototypes The Camira is an interesting one. We'll see if we can find an accurate model of it. Thanks for the ideas!
0.34 drag coefficiency is what the modern chargers have rn
Yep, but that is because they went more into an aggressive styling for the modern version. Softening some of the edges would definitely help.
@@PremierAerodynamics could you compare it to the 1999 Charger concept?
@@illdeletethismusic We will see if we can find an accurate model.
lmao, nascar was like "this is way too good. no."
I'd love to see the aerodynamics on a Volvo 242, they're noisy as hell above 45mph, curious what's going on
We'll see if we can find a model of it.
you missed something.. the fender scoops released that air pressure from the wheels. made the car faster
They say Chrysler ballistic missile engineers told them to make it pointy if they want it to be more aerodynamic.
That is a great aero tip!
It worked
Very cool. ( and there are so many other iconic cars to try out, the Lamborghini Countach for example ;).
Thanks for the idea!
If you could get a Group C car model to test, that'd be incredible.
I'm more interested in the Sauber C9 but any inside into the Diffusers would be of great help.
We will see if we can find a good model of one.
hello, could you make a camaro zl1 simulation in the future? its my favourite modern muscle car and i wonder how it performs
Sure. Thanks for the idea!
Would like to see a comparison between the Daytona and the Superbird!
Thanks for the idea!
Dayton would be the winner with aero, they wanted to give the radiator more air and a tad different styling for the super-bird
Awesome. Now do a real Superbird, and compare them. THAT would be incredibly instructive and really interesting.
Thanks for the idea!
Along the same lines and era, here's an obscure one to do a back-to-back comparison if you haven't already.
1966 Ford Mustang sportsroof (fastback) versus 1966 Shelby GT350R.
Why? What's the difference?
The major concern here is the rear window, more specifically the glass. The GT350R rear "glass" was a custom piece of plexiglass that was folded at the top and didn't reach the window channel, leaving a short gap that allowed cabin air to flow out under the separation of air at the edge of the roof trim.
That's a good idea! Thanks! We've already done the fastback mustang, but we'll see if we can find other models.
my 1989 corolla SR5 apparently has a drag coefficient of 0.33 which is a little crazy when you compare it to this car
Yep, things really improved quite quickly.
Hello sir, where do you get your 3d models?
hi :), could i know which progam you are useing to majure the aerodinamics of the cars?
We use OpenFOAM.
We also have OpenFOAM courses for those who want to learn it.
I would love to see an aerodynamics video on a 1972 Pontiac trans am. Pontiac put a lot of effort into making the car as aerodynamic as they could so I would love to see how it stacks up.
Thanks for the idea! We will do a simulation of it. It may take a few weeks, though.
It should also be considered that the reversed vents above the front wheel wells were stated to be there for "wheel clearance," but were actually designed for pressure relief for the air caught in next to the wheel. I'm not sure if they cut out the vent holes for the consumer versions though.
On the superspeedway tracks, with the downforce the car made, the tyre did indeed rub the insides of the fender there over the bumps, which is why the ones on racecars are wider then the the road going cars, due to the width of race tyres. It also sucks the hot air coming from the brake rotors out, along with hot air from the engine bay if the inner guards are removed on the race version.
That's interesting. Depending on where they were in the wheelhouses, they might've also helped with downforce.
So what does downforce coefficient like actually mean?
As in like lets say the car was traveling at 100 mph how much lift would this be in kg or pounds or whatever?
The Downforce is given by this equation:
Downforce = 0.5 x air density x velocity^2 x reference area x downforce coefficient
So, the downforce coefficient is a good way of comparing different shapes to see which is better.
If the reference area of the car is 10 square meters, the velocity is 30 meters per second, and the downforce coefficient is 0.2, then the downforce will be about 0.5 x 1.2 x 30^2 x 10 x 0.2, which equals 1,080 newtons, which is about 100 kilograms force.
@@PremierAerodynamics thanks!
Chrysler documents state there was 0 lift on the nose and 0 to 250# of downforce on the rear at 180 to 200 MPH. The nose cone reduced the lift from about 600# to 0 and the wing was adjustable from -2 to +10 degrees for 0 to 250# of downforce.
This is why I want to make a carbon fiber replica Daytona with modern suspension and a Hellcat engine reworked for track use and top speed. I want to see if I can’t make a Daytona Hypercar.
That's a cool idea! Let us know how it goes!
I would be interested to see a video like this on a late 2nd generation Camaro (1978-1981). I have a 1978 and it has some interesting aerodynamics. And the spoiler was stolen from Pontiac engineers that was meant to go on the trans am counterpart.
Thanks for the idea! We'll look into it.
@@PremierAerodynamicsexcellent! The 78s like mine don’t have the trans am style flares in front of the tires. But in 79 they added them to the front tires, and 80-81 they have them in front of both front and rear tires
Try a Plymouth Prowler and a Chrysler PT Cruiser? I’m interested to see how those floating fenders do and I think it would be humorous to contrast with the Cruiser in its mediocrity.
Thanks for the idea. We'll see if we can find accurate models of these cars.
You should try a 96 impala ss, see how slippery the bubble era cars where
That's a great idea! Thanks!
That's close to the 0.29 irl c/d, so not bad
Yep, pretty close. There could be several reasons for the differences in CD.
Triumph TR6 next! The last of the great British sports cars
Thanks for the idea! We'll see if we can get an accurate model of it.
Show me the nascar next gen cars from all three car brands next please! 2024 mustang, Camry, camaro stock cars.
Thanks for the idea! We'll see if we can get accurate models of each to do simulations on.
and that is how it went 200mph in 69 lol i love this car
Would love to see the '68 Superbird, w/ Nascar approved body kit but road going suspension
That would be neat, but there is no such thing as a ‘68 superbird, so that’s impossible to do
Pls do Detomaso Pantera next
Thanks for the idea. We will do a simulation of it, but it may take a few weeks.
Air in to the front wheel arches is there to cool the brakes.
That is an interesting idea. I would have thought that the quite open rims would allow for enough brake cooling already.
@@PremierAerodynamics Air comes out that way.
@@PiDsPagePrototypes Typically, the air will only come out of the rear half of the rim.
I'd love to see a 2000s four door chevy blazer compared to a brick
Thank you for the idea. We'll see if we can find an accurate model.
A new Volvo XC40 has the same cd.
Yep, and it's funny in one way that it's a newer car but the drag coefficient is that high, but it's understandable in another because it is a very different type of car. The SUV style makes it harder to get the drag coefficient down.
Really makes me wonder why reproduction kit cars, or even just body panels aren't made for this beast
Maybe they just figured that they wouldn't make enough money off it. Or perhaps it wouldn't break even.
Looking at the wing struts, would angling them parallel to the streamlines (i.e. outward) affect drag or upstream lift on the rear window?
Also, how do modern cars benefit from rounded A-pillars and rear corners, if such corners are still subject to flow detachment?
For the struts, if they are just regular rectangular cross-sections, then angling them so they are in line with the incoming flow is best. You can see that as the flow comes around the rear window, it curves in. That means that the struts are seeing an angle of attack if they are aligned straight.
If they are airfoil sections, then you have a little more leeway and they don't need to be aligned perfectly.
Rounded A pillars help with reducing separation as well as reducing the vortex you get. If you round them but you still get flow separation, then it is probable that the wake is still smaller because the flow isn't pushed out as much.
@@PremierAerodynamics So it seems that the thicker and chubbier the airfoil, the less sensitive it is to angle of attack. An extreme case of this is a circle, which is equally stalled at any angle.
@@PremierAerodynamics why some cars from the 2000's try to separate the flow around the windshield? With sharp edges
@@AwestrikeFearofGods Thicker airfoils stall less abruptly. Generally, going up to a thickness of 30% of the length (chord) of the object will be fine. Once you start going higher, you tend to hit bluff body aerodynamics.
@@heitorbernardes7977 I'm not aware of any aerodynamic car that does that. Do you happen to know of any particular models?
It might also be because of styling reasons. The designers thought it looked better.
so was the previous video inaccurate?
It was accurate for a Dodge Charger with some of the Daytona features, but it wasn't accurate for an actual Daytona.
When you have the right engineers
Definitely.
Can you run a simulation of a 1995 camaro it’s currently my daily driver rn the lt1 burns a Shii ton of gas
Thanks for the idea! We'll see if we can find an accurate model of it.
YOU DONT MESS WITH MOPAR, SON!
You don't mess with the Zohan.
@@PremierAerodynamics disco disco good good
What software is this
OpenFOAM
no Daytona (made in period) has a Diffuser ☠☠☠☠☠
I’m always amazed how young people think the world just got smart and they’re the only ones that could possibly understand…. 😊
Kids these days!
Please do 74 charger!!
Thank you for the idea! We'll see if we can find a good model of it.
@PremierAerodynamics I have one if there's a way to help. 71-74 are pretty much the same model wise, 73-74 only difference being the bumpers stick out about an inch or two with rubber grommets sealing the extra space
@@ianhale4466 Sure, if you have a good model of it, please send it through to the email address in our bio. Thank you.
The Daytona makes the regular version of the '69 Charger look terrible. Lol
I'd like to ese a 34/35 Chrysler airflow at some point, the original areo darling.
We just finished its simulation, so hopefully it will be out next week, or the week after that on Sunday.
@@PremierAerodynamics Oh perfect. I have a 35 SG and there's a few details i've always wondered about. Particularly how much the spare wheel messes with the flow coming off the back, as well as how effective the laid back and split windshield is.
What's the POINT of having subtitles if they're wrong?
Why have a shower today if you're just going to get dirty again tomorrow?
There’s a video made by THE WIND TUNNEL where they take a modern day gen 7 NASCAR and a 1970 Superbird in a game and race 2 laps at Daytona. The Gen 7 is faster off the line than the Superbird but after a while, the Superbird catches up and beats the Gen 7.
Here’s the video link:
th-cam.com/video/Dg4JoDmlgWw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=JM5z6cBTti8yRJHZ
Thanks! I actually saw that one a few weeks ago as well.
Aero is cool
You know it!
55 year old aero is cooler
Definitely.
Now we need some rich Jew tuber too make these models a reality
What?
Only fake Daytona are real. Daytona Dodge didn’t make the Daytona Shelby did.
Sorry, i don't quite understand what you are trying to say, can you refrese it?
@@crazyone3494 only fake Daytonas our real Daytonas Dodge didn’t make the Shelby Daytona did they and you can’t do math with words so God forbid you had 2+2 no let’s make the idiot who typed it out the first time respell it and remix it for you. You’re welcome.
shelby had nothing to do with the daytona, huh??
@@andrewauto6082I think he’s trying to refer to the mid-80s Dodge Daytona (not charger Daytona) Shelby, which are very real. Weird why the original reply mentioned it here since it isn’t a charger…
Nascar was so gay for banning this.
One I really don't like about racing in general is how whenever a team gets too good, they get pulled back with bans and limits.