When I was racing Miatas, I had 32 wheels and tires. And probably another 8 tires unmounted. That was a lot of fucking tires.
Now that I’ve embarked on a new journey with a Veloster, it got me to thinking, how many wheels and tires do I need? One of the things that prompted this question was a steak knife.
Steak knife hole is no match for the tire sealant kit that comes with the VN.
The tires had 16k miles on them, and if you look closely at the pic, you can see some cracking in the first groove on the right. So it was time to replace these anyway.
As it happened, the first tire I needed turned out to be a spare. The tire inflator and bottle of sealant that comes with the Veloster didn’t do shit for the knife wound, and I wasn’t going to be stranded on the road with three passengers again.
There’s a cavity in the trunk designed for a space-saver spare, but because of the big brakes on the VN, a normal spare won’t do. I’ve heard that a 18”compact spare from a Hyundai Genesis will work, but I didn’t find any locally or on Row 52. So I ordered one from Modern Spare, which is an alloy spare tire that has a nice modern look.
Modern Spare makes a good looking alloy space-saver, but it’s expensive.
With that necessity out of the way, I can get to the burning question of how many more tires I need.
If I had unlimited space and funds, I’d probably have six sets of tires. 1) slicks, 2) rains, 3) super 200, 4) enduro 200, 5) One-lap tire 6) snows. But I don’t have that kind of space or money, and so three sets of tires will have to do.
Enduro 200
This is my favorite class of tire, with good performance and great longevity. Enduro 200s aren’t super finicky about camber or pressure, and any street car can use these with great effect.
I’ve raced or tracked on 615K, 651, Z2, NT05, Sur4G, R1R, RT660, A052, VR1, and more. For a long time the Falken 615/615K/615K+ was my favorite tire, but the faster and longer lasting Hankook RS4 is the best of the enduro 200s. It’s not a Super 200, nor is it great in the rain, but it has great feedback and lasts forever. In fact, they usually age out before I wear them out.
And yet I bought Kumho V730s instead. Part of this was because the RS4s were $100 more per tire, but the other part is that I trust Andy Hollis. In the world of motorsports tire testing, he is The Man. Andy says the V730 has a good blend of durability and grip, and is slightly faster than RS4s, which is exactly what I’m looking for.
I don’t know why they are so cheap in 235/40-18, compared to other sizes, but Amazon was recently selling them for $127 with free shipping. They are back up to full price now, but still cheaper than RT615K+.
One Lap tire
By this I don’t mean a one-lap wonder tire, like a RE71 RS or A052, but a One Lap of America tire. If you aren’t familiar with this race, it’s 4K miles of street driving with drag racing, skid pad, autocross, and track driving mixed in. Competitors are allowed one spare tire, but otherwise must use the same set of tires the entire time. Over 80% of the field uses the Michelin PilotSport 4S.
The PS4S is the top of the heap in the UHP category, which includes other great 300-340 TW summer tires like the Continental ExtremeContact Sport. Another tire in this category is the Veloster’s OEM tire, the Pirelli PZ4.
Compared to the PS4S, the PZ4 is a little quieter and has less rolling resistance, but is a touch slower on a race track. Some online reviews say the PZ4 is a better rain tire, but it’s hard to believe based on the PS4S being typically the best in that category.
Anyway, I’d driven the PZ4s at Pineview and did a 1:18 in a stock Veloster, and so I can verify it’s a decent tire with easy handling traits. It’s a couple seconds behind a 200 TW, but if it’s as good on a wet track that people say they are, I’ll be happy. I coach at Watkins Glen regularly and it always seems to rain at least part of the day there. Every. Fucking. Time.
Between the PS4S, ECS and PZ4, it was a difficult decision. But again my wallet made the choice, because I found the Pirellis for $150, half the price of the Michelins.
All-season
All-season tires suck at everything. Some people call them no-seasons. Apt.
But I need a set of cheap tires to put on my OEM wheels, so I don’t wear out my summer tires on the road. And while I don’t intend to drive the Veloster in the snow, I need a tire that works OK when it’s cold out.
When it comes to all-seasons, I go for the cheapest ones. I don’t drive fast on the street, and crap tires are more fun to hoon around Pineview on. I found 235/35-19 Crosswind tires for $65. I’ve never heard of Crosswind, but they have a lot of great online reviews and I got all four tires for the price of one premium 200 TW.
I don’t know if the 235 Crosswind is narrow for its size or if the 235 PZ4 runs wider than normal, but you can see there’s a big difference in the width of the tire.
How the tires stack up: 235/35-19 on 8” is the narrowest. Of the two 235/40-18 tires, the PZ4 are wider than the V730. Stacks have exactly 1 1/4” between each: 36 7/8”, 38 1/8”, 39 3/8”.
Wheels
The OEM wheels are 19×8 +55 and weigh 29 lbs. They look OK to my eye, but I don’t love them for the weight, or for the price of 19” tires. I have no use for them, other than shitty all-season tires.
The Veloster can’t fit wide aftermarket wheels, so most people choose a 18×8.5 wheel with a +45 offset. I believe a 18×9 +42 would fit with mild camber and fender rolling, but there are very few lightweight wheels in this size (Enkei PF01, Konig Rennform, Braid FF). I’m not a cone dodger, but I believe the D-Street folks are using 18×8 +50, which also seems like a good size for a dedicated snow tire.
Side note: The Veloster’s closest competition is the Civic Type R, which rides on 265 tires on 9.5” wheels. Most comparison tests have these two cars lapping very closely, but if you could put the Civic’s wheels and tires on the Veloster, I’m pretty sure the VN would be on top every time.
For my track tires, I bought 18×8.5 +43 Konig Countergrams from Fitment Industries. I always wanted these 9-spoke wheels on my Miata, and I like them a lot on my VN. At 18.7 lbs each, they remove 40 lbs of rotating mass.
Countergram is a good looking, lightweight wheel.
My One Lap PZ4 tires are on 18×8.5 +45 Motegi MR140 wheels I got from Phil’s Tire. They weigh under 19 lbs, and were a bargain at $165 shipped.
Spartan 10-spoke design at a great price.
This is now the second time I’ve mentioned One Lap of America. A seed has been planted.
This post is borderline inappropriate, and if it doesn’t get me cancelled, should probably classify me as a boomer. Enh.
The three-box sedans of my youth had well defined shapes, with a long hood, flat roofs, angled rear window, and flat trunk. These days cars have elongated shapes that blend together front to back.
If you compare a sedan from 20 years ago with a modern one, one design element most new cars share is a big butt. What I mean by that is, the trunks are much higher and wider. This shape brings the deck lid closer in height to the roofline, and when you blend those together, it’s creates a very efficient fastback shape.
Everyone is doing it, and you can’t tell where the roof ends and the trunk begins. The line between hatchback and sedan has blurred to insignificance. I can no longer tell a Honda Civic from a Chevy Malibu from a whatever.
Homogeneous evolution.
This isn’t surprising, because when performance is the driving factor, designs often gravitate towards function. I saw the same thing in skateboarding over the years. Shapes changed from skinny banana boards, then to pigs, then to fish, and now everything is a popsicle.
Skateboard shape evolution
To get back to the shape of cars, if you look at them from the side, most are shaped like airplane wings, meaning they have a cambered profile. As air moves over the top of the car, it creates lift. The more exaggerated the curve, the longer air stays attached, and more lift the car generates. As such, a low trunk lid keeps air attached longer, meaning less drag, but more lift.
On the other hand, a taller trunk (bigger butt) means a more gradual backlight angle, which reduces drag. In addition, air breaks away earlier on a taller trunk. Both of these factors improve performance.
Big butt genetics
Cars with big butts have evolved because they have advantages.
Less drag
Less lift
More trunk space
Fucking hot
Like many performance related genes, big butts have their roots in racing. Read any car magazine and you’ll eventually run into these cliches: “Win on Sunday, sell on Monday,” and “Racing improves the breed.”
Historically, NASCAR had great success partially because people could recognize the cars underneath. The bodywork followed the lines of factory cars (more so on the previous generations), and you could buy a semblance of one on Monday. There were of course many changes under the skin, but one of the key external differences NASCAR allowed was that you could raise the height of the trunk.
Similarly, BMW built the E30 M3 to go production racing, and one of the important elements in the design was to reduce rear-end lift. BMW accomplished this in a similar fashion by making the E30 M3 trunk 1.6″ higher than a E30 trunk.
A DIY E30 M3 trunk.
Big butts improved the racing breed, and that gene is now dominant in production cars as well. As this relates to the only car that matters, each generation of Miata has had a trunk that’s higher than the previous.
The first generation Miata had a flat ass, but she was just a kid back then, and it was normal for that age.
Cute.
The NB grew up a little, and got a lady lump in the middle of the trunk.
Line drawing shows where Mazda added curvature in the trunk.
The NC was like a Miata who went to college and put on the freshman 15: bigger everywhere.
Went to school and got a degree. All my friends call it the big D.
Now in her dirty-30s, the ND is slimmed down, with a butt that is higher, boat-tailed, and pert.
Fuck me dead, the ND looks good from this angle.
Get sprung
The first rule of a production car is that it needs to sell, and that’s based more on appearance than function. But the public has embraced that form follows function, and now big butts are the norm.
Here’s some pics from PornHub.
You other brothers can’t deny, baby got back.Backin’ that ass up.I bet there’s some junk in that trunk.Get that azz over here, bish. Whassup baaaabeeee?Choices, choices.I’d hit that.I think I’m going to faint.Oh c’mon now, that’s cheating!
Stock street car vs stock street car with aero… how much is aero worth in a lap time?
Aerodynamic downforce adds load relative to speed. The faster you go, the more downforce you get. But downforce is often accompanied by drag, and drag increases greatly at speed. The result is that aerodynamic downforce often gives you a faster lap time, but a lower top speed. In the end, it’s safe to say you’ll go faster by ignoring drag and going after as much downforce as possible.
But how much faster you go depends on the track. On a straight drag strip, you’d actually go slower. On a flat, circular track, you’d go a shit ton faster. Most tracks are a combination of straights and curves, and how much aero helps varies greatly on the layout.
To find out how much aerodynamic downforce is worth, I ran some simulations in OptimumLap. For the stock street car build I used Cd 0.39, Cl-0.1. For the aero version, I used Cd 0.43, Cl 1.1. This represents a lot of downforce, and something that is probably not achievable by the average person, but allows you to average the two extremes for most cars that land in between. These are reasonable values for drag and lift, and I’m just spitballing here anyway. So how much of an advantage is worth aero at different tracks?
Track
Aero
Willow Springs
105.4%
Mosport
104.7%
Lime Rock
104.6%
Thunderbolt
104.4%
Watkins Glen
104.1%
Palmer
103.7%
Summit Main
103.6%
Thunderhill 3 mile
103.5%
Road Atlanta
103.5%
Club Motorsports
103.5%
Waterford
103.3%
Mid-Ohio
103.3%
Thunderhill 2-mile
103.2%
NYST
102.9%
Gingerman
102.9%
VIR
102.8%
Thompson
102.7%
Canaan
102.6%
Laguna Seca
102.4%
PV extension
102.3%
SCCA Nats 2010
101.9%
PV original
101.7%
Aero advantage at different tracks, as a percentage of lap time.
There are some surprises here, notably VIR. I thought VIR would be an aero track, but it’s close to the bottom of the list. This is partially the result of two long straights where drag plays a role, but also some tighter corners where there isn’t much downforce.
I’m also surprised by Lime Rock and Thunderbolt. I don’t think of them as aero tracks, but they are. I don’t have a track map for Nelson Ledges, but it would be close to the top, and probably above Watkins Glen.
If I average all the tracks out, aero is about 3.3% faster. But this includes the autocross track from SCCA Solo Nationals in 2010, and Pineview Run’s long and short courses. These are not normal race tracks, and if we remove them, 3.5% is the mean, the median, and the mode.
I’ve often heard people say “Aero is worth 3 seconds per lap,” and that’s actually a really good rule of thumb. If you are doing a 1:30 lap time on a race track with a good mix of corners and straights, 3.5% faster comes out to exactly 3 seconds. But you can see that it really does depend on the track layout: how many fast corners, and the length of the straights.
Note: I can only run simulations on tracks I have in OptimumLap. If you want me to include your favorite track in some future article, sends me your 10-hz GPS data. It can be difficult to get an accurate map at full speed, so if you can drive on the racing line at half speed, it will result in the most accurate track map.
If I was to grade the average splitter I see on the average track car, I’d give it a D+. I know that grades are supposed to average out to a C, but the average person sucks at aero. I see better splitters on Miatas than other cars, and those generally fall in the C+ range.
Splitters on a bell curve.
Grade F: Flimsy splitters or front lips, usually bought on Amazon or eBay, but some reputable aero companies also produce shit. These look like splitters, but that’s where the similarity ends.
Grade D: A misunderstanding of how splitters work results in splitters that are optimized for the top surface, not the bottom. They are are often too high or too low, and universally have sharp leading edges and are flat. Most have splitters wider than the front fascia, but do nothing with the exposed ends. Some might have a spill board on the outer edge, which is at least something, but that does nothing for the underside.
Grade C: A splitter gains downforce through suction, which is achieved primarily through proximity to the ground and using diffusers and/or curvature to accelerate the air underneath. A splitter without height adjustment is like a wing without angle adjustment. A splitter without any diffusion is as useless as a flat wing.
Grade B: With great suction comes great responsibility. Because the air under the splitter is low pressure, everything around it is higher pressure and wants to get in there. You need to extract air using hood vents and fender vents, and kick air upwards and outwards wherever possible.
Grade A: At this point the splitter is making a lot of downforce, but there are still minor problems that occur around the wheels. Air hitting the rotating tires compresses and squirts out under the splitter, and air intrudes through the wheel spokes as well. Mitigating losses around the wheels and tires is the last frontier.
Grade A
Let me show you what a solid Grade-A splitter looks like. It’s not surprising that it’s on a Miata, because we do aero better. We have to; our cars suck. It’s also not surprising my teammate Alyssa Merrill made this. We bounce ideas back and forth, and while I think I’m pretty clever, she’s got a lot of great ideas of her own.
First, you have to use the right material. Alumalite is an automatic grade C, not because of the material properties, but every single person using Alumalite leaves a sharp leading edge. Despite the fact that Alumalite curves nicely, pretty much all of them are flat, as well.
Alyssa chose to use my favorite splitter material, Meranti BS6566 plywood. It’s very light (32 lbs/cu-ft), stiff, easy to work with, boil tested for delamination, and x-rayed for voids. It’s expensive, but you get what you pay for. She’s doubled the thickness of the lip to about an inch and done a good job of rounding the underside of the leading edge, so that air stays attached along the bottom surface.
Doubled lip stiffens the splitter and provides more thickness for rounding the leading edge.
The location of the radiator opening makes a difference to how the pressure side of the splitter functions, and has an effect on drag and cooling. I’ve seen a lot of radiator openings just barely off the splitter. When you put a hole there (for radiator or brake ducts), you lose the high pressure air bubble on top of the splitter, and with it, some of the downforce you’re trying to make. You might be thinking that a lower opening is better for cooling, but with the radiator opening down low, the air has to take a hard upward turn inside your radiator duct. Air can’t change directions at more than 12 degrees, and because the duct is much steeper than that, air separates from the surface of the duct causing drag and losing cooling efficiency.
Alyssa made the radiator opening as high as is practical while retaining the center bumper support. The higher opening holds a larger/taller high-pressure air bubble on top of the splitter, making more downforce. In addition, this provides a straighter route to the radiator, increasing cooling efficiency and decreasing drag.
Mocking up the radiator opening. You can’t get it any higher while retaining the center support.
All the air that goes through the radiator has to go someplace, and the worst place for that is under the car. The best place to send that air is upwards, because it creates downforce. Some people will use louvered hood vents, while others will use just a front wicker and a gaping hole behind. Louvers smooth the air over the hood, and result in less downstream losses on the wing. But since most cars are front-limited with respect to downforce, a gaping hole is a better solution for a track-only car. For a street car, louvers look better for sure.
Having a splitter without any height adjustment is akin to a rear wing without any angle adjustment. You see that kind of junk on OEM body kits, and you can do better. With a proper wing, tuning the high-speed handling of your car is as simple as changing wing angle.
It’s like that with splitters as well. Most of the downforce comes via interaction with the ground, so setting the height is critical. I’ve seen a lot of splitters that adjust for height initially, but then once you mount the airdam or fascia, the height is fixed. This is a C grade. At least there was some height adjustment at first, and that’s an acceptable situation if you can later modify it.
People getting a B grade with a fixed height splitter do so because they understand aero maps and have set their splitter height for maximum downforce, and thereafter do all of their adjustments via wing angle. But having both ends adjustable for downforce is obviously even better.
A-grade splitters are adjustable after the fact. Alyssa used turnbuckles to support the splitter, which are sturdy and make height adjustment a simple twist of the wrist. The turnbuckles are behind the airdam, which makes height adjustment more difficult, but it also completely hides them, for less drag. This is some trick shit.
Easy height adjustment with a twist.
What’s even more trick is that the turnbuckles fasten with pins, and so removing the splitter entirely is super easy. Just yank four pins and the splitter drops off the front.
Pins hold the splitter support rods for quick removal.
Another area to address is the width of the splitter, and what to do with the ends. Under most racing/TT rules, splitters can be the width of the car or the front tires. In most cases, this results in some unused material on the outside edge of the splitter.
You get a D for doing nothing with the exposed end. A flat splitter with a flat exposed end is just additional drag and an invitation to catch on something. You get a C for putting a spill board on the outside, because while this can reduce drag, there are so many better uses of that real estate. Higher grades are achieved by putting a vertical dam on the outside edge (front tire spat if you will), which builds local pressure on top of the blade, creating more downforce. Also, air spilling off that will direct air sideways, extracting air beneath the splitter, making more downforce.
Alyssa chose to do something similar, but pulled the bottom edge of the airdam outwards to meet the end of the splitter. This won’t make quite as much local pressure on top, but should be better at sideways extraction and have less drag. Hard to say which is better, both work.
Airdam meets splitter flush and kicks air sideways.
Let me address another huge mistake: flat splitters. Most people understand wings, and and flat splitters are like flat wings; meaningless. You need some curvature in the rear of the splitter to diffuse the air. When air expands behind a restriction, it accelerates the air in front of it, lowering the pressure. This suction is the purpose of a splitter.
Time attack cars often curve the entire rear of splitter blade upwards, essentially making a splitter diffuser the full width of the car. Miatas have historically used the rear subframe as mounting points for the back of the splitter, and the consequence of that is that Miata splitters are flat. To get suction, Miatas need to use splitter diffusers.
Splitter diffusers operate on the same principle as rear diffusers; they expand air in the tunnel. The diffuser itself doesn’t create the downforce, but it helps air expand and creates downforce in front of it.
Alyssa and I are designing splitter diffusers and will make them for sale sometime this summer. Here’s your first sneak peak.
Big splitter diffusers and vortex strakes.
These splitter diffusers have one large tunnel that diffuses air inboard of the wheels. This is an area of loss to begin with, and also an easy place to extract air from. Most splitters diffusers have only the one main tunnel.
But you’ll notice our splitter diffuser has additional area outside the main diffuser, with strakes. The purpose of this area is to mitigate tire squirt. As a tire rolls forward, it compresses the high-velocity air underneath it, squirting air out the sides. Some of this air goes under the splitter, which decreases the suction and downforce. By adding a diffuser in this area, it slows the air down, hitting the tires with less velocity.
The strakes spin a vortex off the trailing edge. Because vortexes take energy to create, the air hitting the tire has less energy, which reduces the amount of tire squirt. The strakes are also angled just-so, to achieve the maximum amount of extraction from under the splitter and send it outboard, protecting the main tunnel of the splitter diffuser.
Recall that most of the air is dumped inside the wheel well. Air here is extracted via vents on top of the fender, and behind the wheel. By extracting air upwards, you create an opposing force downwards. And by sending air sideways, you mitigate losses from air intruding underneath. Fender vents are important to make the most out of splitter diffusers.
A+ splitter
There’s an old saying I think attributed to fighter aircraft: 90% of the cost is the last 10% of performance. The same applies to car aerodynamics. While this splitter is a solid A, to make this into an A+ requires a lot of labor and cost, for little return.
First, I’d cut out the center bumper support completely, it isn’t necessary for chassis rigidity, and I can fashion a custom bumper after ducting the radiator. Removing that center support allows a slightly higher radiator intake, with the benefits I already discussed. I’d put a 100mm radius on the edge of the radiator duct, and reduce the opening size slightly.
I’d also tilt the radiator forward to reduce the frontal area, and duct the radiator exit straight upwards through an extractor vent to create more downforce. You might call this more engine bay management than splitter improvement, but it’s all related to creating more front downforce, and goes hand-in-hand with designing the splitter and ducting.
I’d also make the splitter slightly wider. Alyssa’s car is for HPDEs and is unbound by racing rules, so an extra couple inches on the end isn’t a problem. With that extra space I’d place place a simple piece of angle aluminum. This end-wicker, if you will, holds pressure on top of the blade and locates a higher stagnation point behind. This pressure differential creates more downforce, and it’ll still kick air sideways for extraction.
With a clean sheet, I’d also add curvature to the entire undertray. I’d laminate two pieces of 6mm plywood together, rather than using a single piece of 12mm. This would allow the rear edge to sweep upwards, creating more suction under the middle of the splitter blade.
The splitter I’m building for my Veloster has a full-width diffuser built in. The strakes show you how much angle there is. (That hole is a hinged door for oil filter access.)
Alyssa’s car doesn’t have a flat bottom, so it’s not a huge problem to diffuse some air into the center of the car. There will be some additional downstream drag due to local flow separations around the suspension bits, exhaust, transmission etc, but this is just a little bit of extra drag on things that were already creating drag to begin with.
I’d also put some height differential between the center and sides of the splitter. Remember early last year when all the F1 cars were porpoising? That was a cyclic gain and loss of downforce via ground effect, and it’s the natural consequence of trying to make as much downforce as possible, losing that downforce, and watching the car rebound on its springs. Once the car is back at a taller ride height, it again gains more downforce, repeating the cycle.
Many cars mitigate that effect by having a higher center tunnel, which gives two different heights of the splitter. This way if the lower part of the splitter goes under 1.5″ height, you don’t suddenly lose all of the downforce. The higher center portion also feeds the underside aero, which isn’t a factor on Alyssa’s car, which has neither a center tunnel nor a flat bottom.
So on her car I’d make the sides of the splitter slightly higher, rather than the middle. This will have the same effect of balancing ground effect losses, and will also protect the splitter blade, because the sides will ground out before the middle when cornering.
Finally, I might address some of the aerodynamic losses that come through the wheel spokes. By covering the bottom half of the wheel with caketin covers and spinning a vortex outboard, I’d reduce losses and redirect air down and out, with a minor gain in splitter suction.
But like I started with, modifying her splitter to go from A to A+ is a 90% effort for 10% gain situation. Addressing other parts of the car to the 90% threshold is time better spent.
I’ve had a tow hitch on just about every car I’ve owned, even my Mini and Miata. I’ve never towed anything with my Miata, but I have a cargo carrier I use for taking an extra set of tires to the race track.
The tow hitch also makes a convenient jacking point for the rear of the car, and I thought I might one day use it as the base for a quick-release diffuser.
So naturally I ordered a tow hitch for my Veloster. I got the Curt model from eTrailer, and in my stupidity, didn’t realize it was for the non-N versions of the car. FML.
Completely missing the obvious.
The tow hitch sat on the shelf for a couple months while I pondered whether to return it or modify it. I saw a post on the Veloster N forum, where someone modified the Curt hitch to fit, and so I thought I might try to do that.
Yesterday was Father’s Day, and I had the day to myself to mess around, so I went after it. The first thing I did was remove the faux rear diffuser. I thought this would make access a lot easier, and it did, but it wasn’t the easiest thing to remove. Then I dropped the exhaust off the three rubber connectors, and test fit the hitch.
Fitting the tow hitch is easy by using a floor jack to raise it in position, then attaching the four supplied bolts. There was some body putty on my frame, which I had to scrape off before the ends would go into place.
Bolted up as intended, the hitch sits quite low. When hitches are this low, they can ground out going up a driveway, and the height is generally too low most trailers with tongue jacks, and even some bike racks. More significantly, the hitch is also directly in the way of the muffler.
Tow hitch mounts quite low. Also, muffler is directly in the way.
I had a few different ideas on how to modify the hitch, including making a new one using the existing side plates. But after measuring some more, I reasoned it might actually fit if the hitch went above the exhaust.
I cut 3.5” out of the side mounting plates and tack welded it together, and then test fitted it. So close! The muffler just barely made contact with the hitch.
I cut off the tack welds with an angle grinder and moved the entire hitch portion half an inch rearward. Then I test fit it again and found it fit quite nicely. But I had mis-aligned the plates a couple degrees and the bolt holes were not lined up perfectly.
Moving the assembly rearward 1/2” gives the muffler plenty of room.
I could have widened the mounting holes, but instead cut the tack welds off one side, re-angled the end plate, and tacked it together again. Third time is the charm, right? Right. This time it fit like a glove, and so I removed it one last time, welded it all up, and spray painted the grinds and welds.
This sounds like a lot of work, and it was. Cutting and welding the mounting plates is a 20-30 minute job, but the trial and error part took hours. But probably the most time consuming part is removing the diffuser, which mounts with a bunch of annoying plastic tabs.
Fits perfectly, barely visible, and no fake diffuser. My original plan was to copy what this guy did, but note how much lower his tow hitch sits. I like mine better.
It would have been pretty easy to cut a square hole so that the trailer hitch protrudes through the bodywork. But I decided not to put the faux diffuser back on. I don’t like fake aero to begin with, and I actually think it looks way better this way. (Please don’t ask me what a cut bumper is worth for drag reduction!)
I’m not sure I’ll tow anything with the VN (the manual says not to), but now I can use my cargo carrier for race tires. I also got a hitch mounted bike rack.
Side note, the Harbor Freight hitch-mounted two-bike rack is a very well thought out design and a bargain at double the price. If you get a short hitch extender, you won’t need to pull the pin and swing the rack down; it’ll clear the hatch lid easily, so you can get to things in the trunk.
My twin brother wrote an article on You Suck at Racing about tire grip, and I’m going to steal some of that content to explore how tire grip and aero are related.
Braking, cornering, accelerating: everything depends on grip. Understanding how rubber tires create and lose grip is therefore fundamental. Let’s start with some theoretical laws of friction.
Amonton’s First Law: The force of friction is directly proportional to the applied load. If this law is true, then a 4000 lb car should stop in the same distance as a 2000 lb car. It weighs twice as much, but it also experiences twice as much friction, so theoretically, the weight of the car doesn’t matter.
Amonton’s Second Law: The force of friction is independent of the area of contact. This means that it doesn’t matter how wide your tires are. Skinny or fat, they have the same amount of grip. And grooves wouldn’t matter either.
Coulomb’s Law of Friction: Friction is independent of velocity. Which means you should have the same amount of grip at all speeds.
Finally, static friction is always greater than kinetic friction.
You might not believe these laws, because you’ve experienced that tires don’t really follow these laws of friction.
If weight doesn’t matter, then why do lightweight cars like Miatas out-handle bigger cars?
If tire width doesn’t matter, then why are wider tires faster? And by the same logic, given the same amount of rubber area, why are slicks faster than a tire with grooves?
If static friction is always greater than sliding friction, why is it faster to have slip angle through a corner?
Four important graphs
In order to understand how tires work, you have to understand the following four graphs. Introductory physics assumes that the coefficient of friction, Mu (μ), is a constant, and that may be true for a block sliding against a table top, but when it comes to tires, μ is not a constant.
Tires generate grip from molecular adhesion, mechanical keying, and hysteresis, and those factors are based on a combination of variables. In each of the graphs below, the coefficient of friction, Mu (μ), changes due to load, temperature, speed, and slip angle:
Graph A shows μ as a function of load (weight). If doubling weight doubled grip, then the line would be flat. But when you double the amount of weight on a tire, there are diminishing returns. When cornering heavily, the outside tires experience more load, and because of that, heavier cars lose more grip than light cars.
Graph B shows μ as a function of temperature. Every tire has an optimum temperature. Both cold and hot tires have less grip than one in the optimal range. If your tires are too wide, they may never get up to optimal temperature, and a narrower tire may heat up more favorably. For this reason, wider isn’t always better.
Tire Rack did a great test where they tested a bunch of wheel and tire widths. The fastest tire wasn’t the widest. And when they went to a wet track, the fastest lap was the narrowest tire.
One thing that contributes to heat is grooves. Squirming tread blocks are a major source of heat. As a result, grooved tires heat up more quickly than slicks. One reason for using slick tires is to spread the load better, but an even more important one is to prevent the rubber from overheating.
Graph C shows μ as a function of speed. The faster the car goes, the less time there is for keying; the ability for rubber to change shape and interact with the road. Under wet conditions, where adhesion no longer applies, grip is highly affected by speed.
Graph D shows μ as a function of slip angle. Every tire has an optimal slip angle. When a tire is twisted, which it always is to some degree, some parts of the contact patch are experiencing static friction while others are kinetic. This mixed state isn’t really addressed by any of the laws of friction, but it doesn’t make this any less real.
Ian made a drawing of what is happening between the road and the surface of your tire, which can help you further understand how tires grip.
Visualizing grip
The following image shows the surface of the road as a jagged green line on the bottom. (If the road surface was perfectly smooth, then the line would be horizontal. But because asphalt has imperfections with peaks and valleys, the road surface is represented as a jagged line.)
Panel A represents a tire (squiggly line) at rest, pressing into the surface of the road (jagged line).
Panel B is what happens when you add load: the rubber goes deeper into the surface, creating more grip. But there’s only so far you can push the rubber in. This is why doubling the load on a tire doesn’t double its grip. Panel B could also be softer rubber or hotter rubber. In both cases, the rubber conforms more easily to the surface, and with more contact, you get more grip.
Panel C shows what happens at high speed. The rubber doesn’t have as much time to change shape, so it doesn’t deliver as much grip from keying.
Panel D shows what happens when a tire overheats. The rubber comes apart, providing less contact with the surface. If the rubber gets hot enough, it may liquify or sublimate, creating a slippery layer between the surfaces.
This visual model isn’t perfect, as it doesn’t give why slip angle matters so much. But hopefully it helps you visualize the interface between your tires and the road, and why some factors add grip, and other factors take it away.
Aero and tires
So that’s how rubber grips the road, but there are other dynamic factors at play here, namely the aerodynamics of the vehicle.
Most cars without aero lift at speed, because the curved surface of the top of the car is longer than the bottom. In other words, cars are shaped like airplane wings, and like wings, they generate lift. The higher the air speed, the less traction there is.
Most cars have a coefficient of lift of around 0.3. Cars with a lot of curvature, like a fastback, have more lift than a three-box sedan or hatchback. By nature of their shape, most cars generate more lift over the rear tires than the front tires.
Cars also generate lift when in yaw, so if your car is pitched slightly sideways in a corner, it has even less traction. Nissan did some tests on this and found there is a fairly linear relationship between yaw angle and lift, and so the more sideways you get, the more the car lifts.
This means as you corner faster and faster, your rear tires have less and less rear grip. You already saw in graph C and panel C that tires have less grip at speed because they have less time for keying. So if you combine the keying losses with the lift and yaw losses, you get a car that’s lost a lot of grip on the rear tires.
And this is why it’s so important for race cars to have spoilers and/or wings.
Aero and lap times
To put some numbers on it, let’s take a look at a few NASA classes at Watkins Glen.
NASA Spec3 is a class for stock-bodied (no aero) E36 BMWs on Toyo RR tires measuring around 14.5 lbs/hp. The Spec3 lap record is 2:13.6.
NASA also has the ST5, class, which is a similar lbs/hp ratio to Spec3, but allows a splitter and wing. The ST5 record is 4.3 seconds faster: 2:09.27.
NASA also has a time trial class, TT5. TT5 and ST5 are the same formula, but the ST5 cars are racing wheel to wheel, whereas the TT5 cars are in a time trial situation with less traffic. Therefore, the TT5 laps are usually faster, but in this case, a surprising two seconds faster: 2:07.202.
If you compare the Spec3 lap record to ST5/TT5, can see that aero (splitter and wing) are worth about 4-6 seconds at Watkins Glen. Let’s call it 5 seconds for simplicity. This isn’t a difference in tire grip, as most cars are on Toyo RRs, but some cars are on Maxxis RC1 for the same lbs/hp (or Hoosiers at a significant penalty to lbs/hp).
Let’s take a look at where the difference is. On the front and back straights, there isn’t a huge difference in top speed, so the cars are pretty similar in lbs/hp. In Turn 7, where aero doesn’t make much difference, the minimum corner speeds (vMin) are pretty similar, and so we’re looking at cars with equal grip, as well. But take a look at Turn 10, the aero cars are going about 10 mph faster!
Lap
Front
Back
T7
T10
Spec3
2:13.6
121
126
62
87
ST5
2:09.3
118
1277
63
96
TT5
2:07.2
123
128
62
98
Now I’m making some pretty big assumptions on driver skill and track conditions being equal. So I’ll do some simulations in OptimumLap, and see if the computer world agrees with the real world.
I’ll start with the Spec3 car using drag and lift values of .44 and 0.3 which is probably in the right area. With these values I get a lap time of 2:13.82 which is pretty close to the Spec3 lap record. I’ll then add a splitter and wing to bring the Cd to .47 and Cl to -0.8 which are pretty fair values for the added aero. Doing only these aero mods on exactly the same car, I get a 2:08.84 lap, which is right in the middle of the 5-second delta we saw in the real world.
So that’s a pretty good verification of aero being worth about 5 seconds. So next I want to take a look at Turn 10 and see how much aero helps here, and if there’s really a 10 mph delta.
Turn 10 Watkins Glen
For the OptimumLap simulations, I’ll use four cars instead of two cars to get more granularity. I’ve given them the same tires with 1.2g of lateral grip, but different aero packages.
No aero – This is the Spec3 car with a coefficient of lift of 0.30, and is represented by the red line.
Zero lift – This car has some minor aero like a spoiler, which cancels out lift, and so the Cl is zero. This is represented by the orange line.
Mild aero – This is the kind of lift and drag you’d see from a spoiler and airdam done professionally (NASCAR level). This is represented by the blue line.
Good aero – This is a car with a splitter and wing, and is represented by the green line.
I’ll examine the grip in the middle of Turn 10, at the 16000′ mark from the start/finish line. This is not quite the minimum speed in the corner, but shows a high lateral load and is as good a place as any to look at G forces. There are a lot of spikes in the graph (like you’d see in Aim Solo data), so imagine it’s more of a smooth arc.
Lateral Gs in Turn 10 on the same tire.
Starting at the bottom of the graph, notice that the car represented by the red line is pulling only 1.14 Gs. Recall that I gave all the tires the same 1.2g of grip, but because of aerodynamic lift, they are losing traction at speed. This is a normal situation for a street car or spec racer with no aero. What the simulation doesn’t show is that most of the grip is lost on the rear tires.
The orange line is a car with a spoiler, which mostly cancels out lift. Lateral Gs are very close to the the static 1.2g value.
The blue line has more than 1.29g grip because tire load is increased with downforce.
The green line is even more dramatic, with 1.4G grip. This is significantly more grip than the car with no aero.
You might be wondering how an increase in lateral Gs plays out in speed through the corner, which is the next graph. I’ve chosen the same 16000′ spot on track to measure the speed, and you can see it’s a difference of almost 10 mph between fastest and slowest.
Turn 10 is a very fast corner, and you’d see a smaller delta on a slower corner, but this is still pretty remarkable. By increasing the load on the tires, tire grip went from 1.14 to 1.4 Gs, and the car with good aero went about 10 mph faster in the middle of the corner.
Downforce and tire wear
Most people imagine that aerodynamic downforce will make your tires wear out faster. More grip = more wear, right? No. Oddly, downforce makes tires last longer.
Tires wear by abrasion; from sliding or spinning. Have you ever flat spotted a tire? Then you know that sliding a tire can wear it out in a couple seconds! Aero increases the load on the tire, giving you more grip, which makes it less likely to spin or lock up.
Aerodynamic downforce also loads the tires more equally. When cornering, the outside tires get loaded more, as a normal byproduct of mechanical grip. However, aero loads are based only on air, and is balanced across the car, left to right, helping to balance the car better.
One could even imagine an active aero device that would split the wing in half and only load the inside tires. Or rudders or vanes that help the car turn using air alone, and use the tires even less.
But let’s jump back from fantasy land… in reality, you get more aerodynamic downforce from rear aero than front aero, and this helps a lot in braking zones, increasing rear load and rear grip. The same is true in acceleration, and more rear grip reduces tire wear (on rear wheel drive cars).
Another way aero increases tire life is when you drive under the limit of the tire. For example, take Turn 10 at Watkins Glen again. Miatas can usually go through at full speed or with a slight lift on entry, and that’s because there isn’t much of a straight between Turn 9 and Turn 10 and Miatas are dog slow. If you’re going through at 85 mph without aero and on the limit of traction, you’ll go through it with aero at the same speed, but well under the limit, and you’ll wear the tires less.
The uphill esses are another place where a Miata is flat out while cornering. You can’t ever reach the limit of lateral grip because the car can’t accelerate fast enough to get there. So you slip less and use less tire.
Now this isn’t going to be true at every race track, most of the time when you have a higher limit, you fuggin use all of it. But sometimes there’s a corner or two where aero now puts you under the limit, and in a long endurance race, this can be the difference between changing tires mid race, or simply saving money. The point being, aerodynamic downforce can make your tires last longer if it keeps your car from sliding.
A good real-world example is the 2000-2002 Corvette SCCA cars, which went from a 315 rear tire in 2000 to a 275 tire in 2001. To increase grip, a rear wing was added in 2001, but it wasn’t enough and tires would only last about 4 laps before starting to go off. After optimizing the aero in a wind tunnel to create more downforce, the same tires in 2002 would last an entire race.
Aerodynamic balance
At this point I’ve only looked at how aerodynamic downforce affects grip and longevity due to increased tire load. But there are other aero factors at play that are important.
Earlier in this way too long blog post, I by mentioned that cars without aero lose rear grip from lift and yaw. In truth, the car loses both front and rear grip, but it loses more rear grip. As a consequence, as the car goes faster, it transitions more and more to oversteer. Most people find this an unsettling situation.
Personally, I don’t mind if a car oversteers at low speed, in fact, I like it. But if it does that at high speed, it scares the shit out of me. Ideally, I like a car that rotates easily at low speed and then transitions to understeer at high speed. This is ridiculously easy to do: add a big wing, and then tune the amount of understeer by adding or removing wing angle.
This is the magic of dynamically balancing the load on your tires using downforce. It’s so easy, and it’s so tunable. However, rear wings and end plates also increase stability by increasing the static margin.
Static margin is the distance between the center of gravity and the center of pressure. Anything that adds rear drag increases the static margin, sort of like streamers on a kite tail. In addition, horizontal areas on the back off your car, like big end plates, shark fins, or even bodywork like a hatchback or station wagon, increases the static margin through sideways resistance to air.
A greater static margin makes the car harder to turn, but also makes the car more stable. When a car goes over the limit of grip, the driver must make steering corrections. Cars that have a higher static margin require fewer steering corrections to bring the car back into line, which is easier on the driver. This also ends up being easier on the tires, and can make the car faster, if a bit less exciting to drive.
Conclusions
Tire grip is arguably the most important factor on a race car. Understanding how tires make grip is therefore one of the most important things a racing driver needs to know. Aerodynamic downforce can greatly influence the balance and grip of the tires at different speeds, and can be used for tuning the car’s handling and ultimately make the car turn faster lap times, and/or stay on track for a longer duration.
I saw a car last week with some of the worst front-end aero I’ve ever seen. No, this wasn’t a crapcan shitbox at a 24 Hours of Lemons race, it was a Porsche 911 GT3 at Watkins Glen.
The car didn’t come from the factory this way, these were user-modifed alterations. The mechanic who services the car does the aero, but he clearly doesn’t understand the fundamentals of how air moves around a car. The owner also doesn’t know anything about aero, and so he trusts the mechanic.
The first thing I notice about the car is it has canards… but doesn’t have underbody aero or a diffuser. Canards are useful for spinning a vortex on the side of the car, which helps the underbody aero work better by sealing the sides, so that air doesn’t intrude underneath. But this car has no underbody aero.
So I asked the mechanic why he put canards on his customer’s car, and he said because it’s been known to fix understeer on BMWs. Wait, what?
What BMWs are we talking about? Unless we’re talking about a half-million dollar 50-year old BMW M1, it’s going to have the engine in the front, and so it won’t have nearly the same weight distribution as a rear-engined 911, and so the baseline aero would be totally different. The standard formula is to balance aero with chassis aero, and on a 911 that means more rear downforce, not more front.
I’m curious if these BMWs were understeering at slow speed or high speed or both? If it’s at slow speed, this isn’t a problem you can fix with aero. If only at high speed, there’s a much easier fix.
There are so many ways to fix understeer on BMWs (or any car) I find it surprising that fitting canards is the preferred method. I wonder if it was the canard manufacturer who started this trend?
This particular 911 GT3 has only has one canard per side, which is also highly suspect, because a pair on each side is more effective at creating a vortex. If you look at a proper race car that is designed to use canards, they are mounted two to a side, one on top of the other.
I’ll take four of these, please!
Anyway, the jump from “fixes BMWs” to “fixes GT3s,” is more of a leap of faith than sound reasoning. I must admit that the simplicity and universality of this solution is very Occam’s Razor, and in this manner I fully support it.
Except for this one thing: canards don’t make a lot of front downforce because they don’t have an airfoil shape. Wings create downforce from pressure on the top side, and suction underneath, and the suction side does the most work. Wings are also highly efficient with a lift/drag ratio of 10:1 or greater. Canards are super draggy and have a L/D of 3:1 or worse (Katz).
Because canards aren’t a proper airfoil, only the pressure side of the canard creates downforce, the air on the back side just detaches and causes drag. Also, there isn’t much planform area, and being so narrow, a disproportionate amount of that area is in the boundary layer, which is stagnant. So whatever downforce they make isn’t much. You could get the same front grip without the drag penalty by putting a 20 pound sack of potatoes in the frunk.
So if canards are truly fixing understeer on BMWs, it’s not by creating front downforce, it’s by the vortex they create. This propagates downstream as turbulence and reduces the effectiveness of the rear wing. That’s right, you didn’t fix understeer by adding a bunch of front grip, but by reducing rear grip. It seems pretty obvious to me, but I guess I’ll mention it for the canard crowd: adjusting the wing for less angle is a much better way to reduce rear downforce at speed. And as a consequence, it also reduces drag.
Anyway I wrapped up that conversation about canards and it left me wondering if the mechanic knew anything about aerodynamics. What I noticed next made me certain that he didn’t. He completely removed the front undertray.
The undertray is essential; it reduces drag, aids in cooling, and most importantly, it’s what provides the front end downforce! Well, no wonder the car understeered, you took away all the suction and gave it a bunch of front end lift!
I looked under the car and right away I noticed a sharp edge where air will separate. After detaching from the front lip, the air then has to rise an inch or so to stay attached to the underside, and it can’t change direction so quickly, so it remains detached, creating drag.
Air detaches at the front lip.
The next thing I see are a trio of holes under the car where air exits the radiator. Guess what? All that air going through the radiator now creates drag and lift underneath the car!
Air exits the radiator and goes under the car….
One thing that surprised me was that the car comes from the factory with splitter diffusers. Well played, Porsche, well played. These diffusers help air expand, which accelerates the air in front of them, creating more downforce. Unfortunately on this car, there’s no undertray, so the splitter diffusers accelerate the air over a dirty, detached surface. I mean, there’s even a hole in it.
Splitter diffusers from the factory doing absolutely nothing for downforce in this sorry state.
Fixing this
I could fix this car’s front aero and it would go a couple seconds faster at Watkins Glen. As I mentioned at the end of The Dunning-Kruger of Car Aerodynamics, aero is largely the following principles: attached flows, changing the direction of air, maximizing suction, managing tire wakes, and manipulating vortices. What did I mean by that?
Starting at the front, I’d put a piece of Meranti BS6566 under that front lip. I’d cut it to fit snug and round the underside of the front lip, so air stays attached.
I’d then hinge the undertray at about half distance and slant it upwards to join with the splitter diffusers. By angling the entire rear half of the undertray, it would force the air to change direction and expand. This is essentially a diffuser running across the full width of the car. This will maximize suction in front of that area, and make a shit ton of downforce.
I want to keep all that suction in there, but there’s a jet of air that squirts sideways from the front tires and shoots directly into the low pressure area. As the tire rolls forward, it compresses the air underneath, and when combined with the velocity of air hitting the tire, you get a phenomenon called tire squirt.
To minimize that effect, I’d use a trio of strakes (similar to canards) to spin a vortex and smash it sideways into into the face of the tire. Vortices take energy to spin, and so this takes away energy in the air hitting the tire, which reduces tire squirt. The vortex spins outboard which aids extraction from underneath, increasing suction.
The top side of the splitter has exposed ends doing nothing. I wrote about that in Your Splitter Sucks, and rather than using something like an air fence, I’d either make vertical spats in front of the tires to create more local downforce on top of the splitter blade, or add just a simple piece of angle aluminum to kick air up and out and create more suction underneath.
Then I’d vent the fenders, first by pulling the back edge away to create a gap. You’ll recall that the car already has splitter diffusers dumping behind the wheels, and the venting is necessary to allow the air from the wheel wells to escape. This helps the splitter create more downforce.
I’d also put a vent on top of each fender, The purpose is similar to the vent behind the wheel, but with the added benefit of extracting air upwards. Air moving upwards pushes the car downwards.
There’s already a vent on the top of the bumper behind the radiator, and I’d tilt the radiator forward, and duct and extract the air upwards. Apparently later model GT3s have this style extractor vent from the factory. Sending air upwards instead of underneath the car makes downforce instead of lift.
The extractor vents on the fenders and the radiator would both get a wicker on the front edge. This holds local pressure on the upwind side, and locates a higher stagnation point on the downwind side. This change in pressure and change in direction creates more downforce.
There are probably a few smaller things, but these modifications would cover most of the front end. Oh, and the first thing I’d do is remove the fucking canards.
For the few dozen of you who subscribe to the blog, let me update you on some of the things that have been happening in my life, and how that’s going to affect this site and future content.
I bought a Veloster N for what I thought were pretty good and mature reasons. I took the car to Watkins Glen for Grid Life, but I didn’t really get a chance to open it up in the monsoon conditions. An NC Miata would have been a better choice (if you don’t get that joke, it’s a boat reference).
Then I drove the VN out to Detroit to see my buddy Chris Gailey, and in preparation for that, I built a bunch of aero parts for testing. No plan survives the enemy, and my Veloster didn’t survive one lap.
I accelerated out of T2 at Waterford and heard a loud noise, which then got louder, kind of like an exhaust gasket getting blown out. I’d recently replaced the straight pipe with OEM, so I thought maybe this was a gasket issue. But then the car lost power, and then died as I entered the pits.
We took off the undertray and found oil; it didn’t look good. A warning came up on the screen, I touched that, and it called Hyundai service. They said they’d pick up the car and take it to the Hyundai dealership, Glassman Hyundai in Southfield.
Sad face emoji
While waiting for the tow truck driver to arrive (high as a kite), I let Chris’s son have my track day. The good folks at Summer Track Days allowed Griffin to drive in my place, and I let Griffin borrow my helmet. Unbeknownst to me, Griffin let his buddy borrow my helmet so he could ride shotgun. Welp, the passenger got sick, couldn’t get my helmet off in time, and threw up all over the inside of my lid. No good deed goes unpunished.
We rented a Jeep Grand Cherokee, possibly the worst car I’ve ever driven, and drove 500 miles home to the smell of stale cigarettes. People who smoke in rental cars should have their lungs ripped out. Fuck you.
The people at Glassman Hyundai were awesome, especially Ralph, and kept in touch with me. The good news: the motor will be replaced under warranty. The bad news: N motors are on “international backorder status.” I’m pretty much expecting October.
I had some track days coming up, so I dusted off my 1.6 Miata, which recently had HLAs serviced and new valve springs. I spent a bunch of time on new aero for that, including fitting my fastback to it.
Same shit, different day
Then I took it up to Pineview, and it dropped a valve in the first session.
So now I’ve got three broken cars and four broken engines (my race car’s engines are also currently apart) and I have nothing to drive for the PCA event coming in a few days. So I figure I’ll find a 1.6 engine, throw it in there stock, and at least I can drive something for two days at Watkins Glen.
I found a 1.6 a few hours away for $750, and tried to trace back the ownership. It was apparently Dieter’s engine once upon a time, and I get his assurances that it’s decent. So I buy the engine, take it over the Shade Tree, and have them install it. Except the engine is rusted on the inside and worthless. WTF?
Well, apparently Dieter had two engines, this one isn’t the one he was talking about. This engine used to be Stefan’s, and he pulled it out of a junkyard car and sold it before checking into it. Fucking boat anchor, that’s all it’s good for.
So now I’ve got five broken engines and no car, so I figure I’ll go to the PCA event and just do data coaching. That didn’t really work out great due to some scheduling mishaps (the classroom sessions were double booked with my data sessions), and then just a lack of people wanting to do data. So I didn’t get a chance to use my vMin coaching tools or show the slide deck I worked so hard on.
So I sat in the stands with Josh and watched turn 10 for a bit. In an entire session (20+ minutes), four people hit the rumble strip on exit. I’d say 90% of the cars left a car width or more on the exit of the turn. A good number of cars exited turn 10 in the middle of the track. Did I mention this was the advanced run group? Maybe data coaching isn’t that important.
All of this has kind of reframed what I want to do with my life. I’ve spent 12 years racing and being a prisoner of this hobby. And it isn’t just the racing I got into, there’s the instructing, data coaching, racing rules, Pineview bullshit, etc. And of course all of the aerodynamic crap: theory, building, testing, simulations, and eventually writing it down here.
I’m not sure what comes next, but I’m due a break from the chaos. One thing I’ve decided for sure is I’m no longer owning a racing team or any Miatas. I’m selling or giving away everything Miata related. It’s been a great journey, but that part of the journey has come to an end.
As soon as I’d made that decision, I felt better. My wife simply said “It’s about fucking time!”
I’m still going to write; I have a lot of unfinished drafts and some really good ones coming up. I’m still going to race, but it’ll be as an arrive-and-drive. I’m still going to track my Veloster and do a bunch of aero experiments, but it’s going to be a while before I get back to it. The future is undefined, but looks brighter already.
Just today Ralph from Hyundai sent me a little movie – the new engine is in, the car is running, and it’s ready to be picked up. Hallefuckinglujah.
My brother recently wrote a blog post on the Driving Progression, which is a Dunning-Kruger of performance driving. I thought it would be fun to do the same thing for aerodynamics.
If you don’t know what the Dunning-Kruger effect is, it’s that people with very little knowledge have a lot of confidence. They’ll freely share the benefit of their inexperience with everyone. As they gain knowledge, they start to realize they don’t know anything, and lose confidence, eventually reaching a low point of “I don’t know shit.” After hitting rock bottom, an increase in knowledge steadily rebuilds confidence to the point that they master the topic.
The D-K effect is not about being stupid, it’s about not knowing any better. That’s certainly how I started my journey through aerodynamics, and it’s probably similar to how other people got started.
I’ve identified four general stages of the D-K effect, which I’m calling Fanboi, Learning, Experiments, and Optimization.
Fanboi – Buying aero parts for looks, drag reduction, or blind trust.
Learning – The apple of knowledge brings despair.
Experiments– Tools and experiments to expand knowledge.
Optimizations – Applying aerodynamic principles to any object with good results.
Fanboi
The first phase of aerodynamics is largely acquiring parts without understanding their specific use.
Appearance – Many people buy aero parts because they look cool. Most dealer options like a front lip, side skirts, or spoiler are early on the upward slope.
Drag reduction – People easily grasp the concept of drag reduction, and not knowing any better, it defines the next level of purchases or DIY projects.
Blind trust – At this point a person has bought a wing or spoiler and some other aero that has good results (I dropped 3 seconds with a wing!), and now they think more aero is better and buy it all, whether or not it’s designed well or would be useful on their car.
You can ask a fanboi why they have this aero part, or how it works, and you’ll get a reply that has nothing to do with personal aero knowledge and everything to do with blind trust in the manufacturer. Businesses have a vested interest in parting you with your money, are they really the people you should trust on this matter?
Some people never get past the Fanboi phase, and good for them, ignorance is bliss. But some of them watch a video or read a book, or god forbid they find this website, and then they fall down a very deep hole into despair.
Learning
The next phase begins when a person does actual research into aerodynamics, and thus begins a slippery slope down Dunning-Kruger’s backside. Often YouTube is their first inkling that things don’t work exactly the way they’d hoped. For example, maybe they saw Kyle Forster’s video on how wings don’t work with convertibles. Or they watch Julian Edgar read yet another bedtime story from his book.
Some people might stumble onto my Occam’s Racer website, and if you’re a regular reader, you know I do a lot of debunking and peeking behind the curtain. Other notable stops on the way to the pit of despair include Competition Car Aerodynamics, by MacBeath and the more challenging Race Car Aerodynamics, by Katz.
From there you might dig deeper into to the grandfather of texts, Hucho’s Aerodynamics of Road Vehicles, or hit the lowest point, SAE papers and peer-reviewed university studies. At this point aerodynamics, or should I say, fluid dynamics, is so full of numbers, equations, and nerd stuff that you feel you know shit-all of nothing.
Experiments
Further knowledge comes through experimentation. Just as you were once a fool to trust aerodynamics manufacturers, you’d be a fool to trust anything you read or see on YouTube. So this next phase is where you get hands-on, experimenting to see the result.
Personally I jumped right into Airfoil Tools, OptimumLap, and other free resources, then DIY’d my own projects. A more sensible approach, and one I took later, is to enroll in Kyle Forster’s (JKF Aero) online course on aerodynamics.
Most of us aren’t going to have the means to get into CFD, and so Kyle does that for you, performing the experiments you’d do, and doing a nose-to-tail breakdown of different cars in CFD. If you are serious about aero, there’s no better use of your time or money.
It’s worth noting that Kyle uses OptimumLap in his course, since it’s a great way to get instant validation on whether something works or doesn’t, and how it plays out on different race tracks. I was already using the program for years before taking Kyle’s course, and it being FREE, everyone who is serious about aero or validating any other modifications to their car should use it.
The final stop in the Experiments stage is oddly where I started: real-world testing. That could mean going to a wind tunnel, or in my case, hiring a professional to make Watkins Glen into our own personal wind tunnel. And with that hard data, one comes to certain realizations about aero, and it turns out that it’s not that difficult after all.
Optimizations
Once you reach this level of understanding, you realize it’s not about the parts, but by applying certain principles. You are either optimizing the car for a particular rule set, or in the absence or racing rules, to handling characteristics, efficiency, a particular race track, or other factors.
The principles go something like this:
Attached flow – You want to keep air attached along surfaces. A thicker and turbulent boundary layer is better than detached. Streamlined objects have rounded leading edges and break cleanly at the trailing edge.
Change the directionof air – If you aren’t changing the direction of airflow, you aren’t doing dick. Most often you want to send air upwards, creating an opposing force: downforce. You don’t want to change direction too much or air detaches, causing drag and destroying downforce.
Maximize suction – Pressure is good, suction is better. Maximize suction and minimize losses to the underside of splitters, underbody, and wings.
Manage tires – Tires are draggy, disruptive to airflow, and create a jet of air as they roll forward on the ground. Manage tire drag and squirt to mitigate losses.
Manipulate vortices – Vortices are usually thought of in terms of loss and wasted energy, but you can manipulate vortices to create air fences, delay flow separation, reduce energy on the face of the tire, etc. At the bleeding edge of performance, like F1, it seems like most of the effort is spent managing and manipulating vortices.
Conclusion
There is nothing wrong with being on the early, upward slope of the Dunning-Kruger graph. Choosing aero parts because you like the way they look, or because you support a particular manufacturer, or because they work and you don’t care why, is a happy place to be. This covers the 90% usecase.
In reflection, I can’t think of a compelling reason to get into early aerodynamic texts or plunge into SAE papers, they can be too much. Instead, leave that shit to me, I’ll translate it for the masses and make it fun to read (I won’t say “dumb it down” because y’all are smart or you wouldn’t be here).
But if you really want to get into aerodynamics because you’re developing something for the last 10% of performance, or because you need a competitive edge, then I’d start with the JKF aero course. You’ll definitely be making your own aero parts, because the aftermarket doesn’t support the kinds of things you’ll be doing, so plan on investing in tools and materials.
This is a worthy journey, but all-consuming, and requires sacrifices. Have fun with it.
This year I’m teaming up with Chris White and Josh Herbert to offer data coaching at Watkins Glen International, for events organized by Niagara PCA. Other dates and tracks are TBD, get in touch with us if you’d like us to bring our data program to your event.
Data coaching is using GPS and car telemetry data to understand what the driver is doing in minute detail, and suggest ways to improve speed, consistency, and safety. Data coaching has benefits to students, coaches, and HPDE organizations.
For students, data coaching is an individualized, actionable improvement plan, using the best information possible. Every student has unique strengths and weaknesses, and data coaching pinpoints exactly what the student needs to work on.
To driving instructors, data coaching is a way to teach more than one student per day. As a right-seat instructor, I can only focus on one student at a time, but as a data coach, I can coach several people per day, and follow up with them afterwards.
For HPDE organizations, data coaching is an effective way to reinforce the curriculum. If you want to see if the student is releasing the brakes gradually, or following a prescribed racing line, or anything else you are teaching in class or on track, it’s as simple as looking at the data.
Data is not only useful as a coaching tool, but as a snapshot from a point in time. For example, if you suspect that your car is down on power compared to a previous date, you can look back at the data and see if your longitudinal acceleration has changed. Likewise, you might change parts on your car, and by comparing with previous points in time, you can quantify the differences each part makes.
Who is data coaching for?
Novice drivers don’t need data; they need to listen to their instructor. In rare cases a highly analytical student might learn primarily through seeing graphs and numbers, but for the 95% case, data is not a useful learning tool at the novice level.
Intermediate drivers absolutely need data coaching. Most HPDE organizations only have enough instructors for novice drivers, so there’s very little in-car instruction or coaching after the novice level. As a result, intermediate drivers often plateau for a long time using only the skills they learned as a novice.
Advanced drivers are in one of three camps: 1) those who understand that data is essential, 2) those who have never tried it, and 3) those who don’t want to know how bad they suck. For the first group, you might book a data coaching session with one of us as a second opinion, but you’re probably already on the right track. The second group is why we have this program! We’ll provide the hardware, software, and know-how to make you a better driver. If you’re in the third group, we have a new program to help break the ice: vMin coaching.
vMin coaching
The largest hurdle to data coaching isn’t the hardware, the software, or the ability to read the data. It’s “I don’t want to know how bad I suck.” I’m not being flippant, these are the exact words I hear all the time.
Listen, we all suck at driving. Every one of us has some corner we can’t get our head around or are afraid of. For me, it’s Turn 6 at Watkins Glen. I had a racing incident there with another car (my fault), and I still pussyfoot my way into and out of that corner. If I’m being completely honest, I also underdrive the bus stop and T11. “Hello, my name is Mario and I suck at driving.”
What’s also normal is that you have one or more corners you’re really good at. I have a lot of confidence in T7. You probably also have corners that you’re really good at, too. But is that a good corner, or do you just think so? And by the same measure, are the corners you suck at really that bad?
So you don’t want anyone to know how bad you suck, but you want to find out which corners you need to work on. You can do that by looking (privately) at your minimum corner speeds.
The importance of vMin
Pretty much everyone knows who Ross Bentley is, and I’d wager a good percentage of us have read Ultimate Speed Secrets. Aside from publishing books and teaching classes, Ross also had a subscription series called Speed Secrets Weekly, which was a weekly email of driving advice. On his 500th and final installment of Speed Secrets Weekly, Ross Bentley chose to save the best for last, and focus on what is arguably the most important aspect of performance driving: minimum corner speed.
Minimum corner speed, often abbreviated vMin, is the lowest speed you achieve in a corner. Why did Ross choose to write about vMin in his final SSW?
Min corner speed is one of the best measures of driver experience: Intermediate drivers throw away speed to optimize late braking; Advanced drivers hoard min speed like it’s gold.
Raising your min speed is often the easiest way to go faster.
Earlier I wrote that intermediate drivers need data coaching. The primary reason is because they place too much importance on late threshold braking. Brakes are not just for slowing the car – brakes are for adding front grip, changing weight balance, turning the car, and above all, setting the ideal minimum speed for each corner.
If your vMin is too low, you can’t make it up by driving harder: applying throttle early in the corner results in oversteer or understeer. If your vMin is too high, you’ll have to roll off the throttle mid corner, or be later to full throttle. If your vMin is just right, the car is easy to turn and your car corners effortlessly. So how do we find the minimum corner speed for each corner?
Estimating vMin in every corner
At Watkins Glen, you can estimate your vMin in every corner by looking at turns 7 and 8. The vMin in these corners are usually within 1 mph of each other, and you can use the greater of the two vMin values to determine your min speed in every other corner. For example, Turn 1 is typically 108% faster than Turns 7 and 8. Turn 10 is about 135% faster. It doesn’t matter if you’re on R-comps or all-season tires, it’s the same ratio.
To data coach yourself, I’ll give you a lookup table, and you’ll start by circling your vMin in each corner. Then read from left to right across from T7-8 and you’ll probably see that most corners are in the same row. However, some corners will be above that line – those are corners you can improve on. In the example below, this person could raise their vMin in the bus stop, T6, and T11.
You might have noticed that the table says “No Aero” at the top. Tire compound doesn’t change the ratio between the speeds in each corner, but downforce does. So I’ve created different lookup charts for cars with no aero, and varying levels of downforce.
You might be wondering how I got all this data. A lot of it comes from looking at professional drivers on YouTube. That’s right, you don’t need a fancy data gathering devices to log vMin. A phone app or video camera showing the MPH is enough to get the min speed. Of course I also backed this up with lots of Aim Solo data from veteran drivers. I put all this data into a spreadsheet and averaged the values and came up with the ratios for each corner. It was surprisingly consistent.
If you want to coach yourself on vMin I’ll be offering a classroom lecture once per day. I’ll explain the concept in more detail and hand out the the lookup tables and a cheat sheet of strategies (mostly coming from Ross Bentley) that will help raise your vMin. You can choose to share that with other people, or keep the data private.
By working on your min corner speed, you can see huge gains in terminal speed. It won’t surprise me when one of you tells me that a 1 mph increase in vMin gave you 3-5 MPH at the end of a straight. Once you see how important data is as a feedback mechanism, some of you may want to go deeper into one-on-one data coaching.
One-on-one data coaching
If you schedule a one-on-one data session with me, Chris, or Josh, this is how a typical data coaching day goes.
First we’ll give you an AIM Solo and mount it securely in your car so that you can reach the power button and see the display. We have suction cup mounts and rollbar mounts, or can use any 1″ RAM style mount that’s already in your car.
In the first session, just drive as you normally would. We need to make sure the unit is functioning 100% correctly, and get some baseline laps. We also want to make sure you can see the delta timer, if you choose to use that.
Delta timer
If you’ve never used a delta timer, you’re in for a treat. Any decent motorsports data logger (or phone-based lap timer) can be set for predictive or delta time.
In predictive mode, the main display shows the lap time that the Aim Solo thinks you’ll do if you continue at this pace. I don’t like this setting, because lap times are not something we need to focus on – there’s too much importance put on this metric, and it’s too granular to be useful.
I much prefer the delta timer mode, in which the display shows a + or – sign with the amount of seconds that is different from your best effort at that particular point on track. So, if you roll through T1 at Watkins sGlen and glance at the delta timer going up to the esses and see -00.55, you’ll know that whatever you did in T1 this time was a lot better than before. You can use the delta timer to try different lines and techniques and get immediate feedback on whether it was a good idea and execution… or not.
The delta timer is a distraction, so don’t look at it unless you have clear track around you and you’ve unwound the steering wheel. But once you’ve gotten the hang of looking at deltas, it can be difficult to drive without that feedback.
Race studio analysis
After a couple track sessions, bring the unit back so we can download and review the data. The first thing we’ll do is load your best lap into Race Studio and look at the speed trace. The shape of the speed trace shows where you brake and how hard, where you get on the gas, and how smooth you are.
Next we’ll load up some more laps to see how consistently you’re driving. Consistency isn’t necessarily the goal here, because it’s good to experiment with lines, braking points, etc. But if you’re repeatedly doing something good or bad, it’s worth noting.
Next we might look at all your laps and split them into sectors. Analyzing sector times is a great way to stitch together different laps. In a crowded run group, it can be difficult to get a clean lap, and by using sectors, we can estimate what your runs would look like, even on a crowded day.
There are a lot of other things we can look at during our 1:1 sessions. Most of it will depend on what we see in the data, which tells us what you need to work on.
Advanced data coaching
There’s a limited amount of coaching we can accomplish in one day, but once we have your data, we can do follow-up sessions afterwards.
Comparisons – Similar car and tires, different drivers. What can you learn from other people? What can you teach us?
Lat and Long G – Are you braking and cornering at the limit?
Friction circle – How well are you blending inputs?
Areas for improvement – Backing up the corner, compromise corners, racing line, etc.
One of the great things about data coaching is that it keeps you engaged between events. So instead of going home and not thinking about driving until your next event, you can make a plan for what you’ll do on your next DE. Using data feels like it shortens the time between events, and makes you faster in the interim.
Computer simulations
Another thing we can do with advanced data analysis is to create a computer model of your car and simulate your car on track in the virtual world. This allows us to change the tires, aero, weight, power, etc, and see what potential benefit this provides.
For example, I see a lot of people focusing on weight reduction. If you could remove 100 lbs of weight, what will that do? Well, I can tell you exactly (or rather the computer can tell you). And that goes for adding power, decreasing drag, increasing downforce, switching to softer tires, and many other variables.
Like advanced data coaching, this is a service we’d have to do in a follow-up session. But it all starts with getting the data.
Get signed up!
If you want data coaching at Watkins Glen, sign up for one of the Niagara PCA events. The vMin coaching is free, and the 1:1 data coaching is a modest $50.