Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Roof spoilers: Eye sore and they suck

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mike RT4
    replied
    As a bit of fun, they were so proud of reducing the lift that the did this advert back in the day LOL:
    Last edited by Mike RT4; 02-11-2024, 02:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike RT4
    replied
    Originally posted by Slideways View Post
    CSL bootlid does not have the button/handle to open it nor the tool kit, so that is probably worth two or three pounds.
    Agreed, so possibly a fraction lighter when that is taken into account. However, bare weight of each there is a negligable difference. Would be interesting to see how the actual fully fitted weights compare.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike RT4
    replied
    Originally posted by Albino09 View Post

    I feel foolish for copy+pasting the 200-160 conversion without bothering to check the math, but I'll own that. Very interesting story about the engineering behind the project, especially the note about the weight. A standard CSL trunk is actually no weight difference vs. the standard bootlid?

    Also dug a little further and finding that the swing isn't +18 to -10kg, but rather +18 to +10 (std --> CSL). This tracks with the engineers saying the goal was to reduce lift. So now the point is less than 20lbs difference at 120mph.
    I did some follow-up research as well, and you are correct, I always thought that the negative figures quoted were in relation to negative lift (i.e. down force), but they relate to downforce, so negative figures are lift. Learned something new myselft today. Thanks for making me question this and what I "thought" I knew.

    These are the Sport Auto figures referred to:
    Last edited by Mike RT4; 02-11-2024, 02:28 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slideways
    replied
    CSL bootlid does not have the button/handle to open it nor the tool kit, so that is probably worth two or three pounds.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albino09
    replied
    Originally posted by Mike RT4 View Post
    I can give you some insight into how the ducktail actually came about. When we had the 20th anniversary meet-up for the CSL in May last year, we were fortunate to have many of the engineers on hand responsible for all aspects of the CSL. One of those was the aerodynamicist Jörg Ellers.

    Gerhard Richter who was in charge of M division at the time the CSL was being developed would do a walkaround of the shop floor every evening to inspect how the work on the project was progressing. Originally the CSL was actually supposed to get a bolt-on wing on the standard boot but Jörg who was responsible for the car’s aerodynamics had calculated that a ducktail would provide the required negative lift and look much better than a bolt-on wing. So having produced a clay model as proof of concept, he decided that on the next evening he would leave the model of the car with the ducktail (complete with a lacquered foil covering to further highlight the design) in plain sight for Mr Richter to see when he was making his rounds, and wait to see what his reaction was. Upon spotting the model, Mr Richter stopped immediately and started to study the rear. Waiting for his moment Jörg then took the opportunity to join him and explain that the ducktail provided the same required aero balance as the much less aesthetically pleasing bolt-on wing. Fortunately Gerhard Richter agreed and responded that he loved it and the rest as they say, is history!

    Obviously due to the shape, BMW used their newly developed fibre reinforced plastic material to show case what shapes they could produce​ and it is actually practically the same weight as a standard boot (so wasn't done for weight-saving reasons).

    I would also point out that the speeds quoted for the downforce at 124mph (which is the 200km/h quoted - which is the norm for most downforce figures). I have no idea how someone calculated that to be 160mph......

    It is pretty easy to calculate the correct speed, as the 0-100kmh time is equivalent to 0-62mph, so 2 x 62 = 124mph LOL.
    I feel foolish for copy+pasting the 200-160 conversion without bothering to check the math, but I'll own that. Very interesting story about the engineering behind the project, especially the note about the weight. A standard CSL trunk is actually no weight difference vs. the standard bootlid?

    Also dug a little further and finding that the swing isn't +18 to -10kg, but rather +18 to +10 (std --> CSL). This tracks with the engineers saying the goal was to reduce lift. So now the point is less than 20lbs difference at 120mph.

    Leave a comment:


  • old///MFanatic
    replied
    Originally posted by Albino09 View Post
    M3 E46
    Lift Force at 200 Km/h (160mph) : 18kg (39.6lb) at rear
    M3 CSL
    Lift Force at 200Km/h (160mph) : -10kg (-22lb) at rear

    60lbs of downforce vs. the standard M3 at 160mph is hardly what I would a real performance advantage. The true value of the trunk is that it is made of carbon and the rest is a bonus.
    200 Km/h is 124mph.

    Originally posted by Albino09 View Post
    I stand corrected on the material used, but not the rest.
    As brought up by another member, apparently you stand corrected on more.

    Leave a comment:


  • heinzboehmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Mike RT4 View Post
    I can give you some insight into how the ducktail actually came about. When we had the 20th anniversary meet-up for the CSL in May last year, we were fortunate to have many of the engineers on hand responsible for all aspects of the CSL. One of those was the aerodynamicist Jörg Ellers.
    Damn, didn't realize the engineers were at that meet too! Would have loved to have the chance to pick their brains.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike RT4
    replied
    I can give you some insight into how the ducktail actually came about. When we had the 20th anniversary meet-up for the CSL in May last year, we were fortunate to have many of the engineers on hand responsible for all aspects of the CSL. One of those was the aerodynamicist Jörg Ellers.

    Gerhard Richter who was in charge of M division at the time the CSL was being developed would do a walkaround of the shop floor every evening to inspect how the work on the project was progressing. Originally the CSL was actually supposed to get a bolt-on wing on the standard boot but Jörg who was responsible for the car’s aerodynamics had calculated that a ducktail would provide the required negative lift and look much better than a bolt-on wing. So having produced a clay model as proof of concept, he decided that on the next evening he would leave the model of the car with the ducktail (complete with a lacquered foil covering to further highlight the design) in plain sight for Mr Richter to see when he was making his rounds, and wait to see what his reaction was. Upon spotting the model, Mr Richter stopped immediately and started to study the rear. Waiting for his moment Jörg then took the opportunity to join him and explain that the ducktail provided the same required aero balance as the much less aesthetically pleasing bolt-on wing. Fortunately Gerhard Richter agreed and responded that he loved it and the rest as they say, is history!

    Obviously due to the shape, BMW used their newly developed fibre reinforced plastic material to show case what shapes they could produce​ and it is actually practically the same weight as a standard boot (so wasn't done for weight-saving reasons).

    I would also point out that the speeds quoted for the downforce at 124mph (which is the 200km/h quoted - which is the norm for most downforce figures). I have no idea how someone calculated that to be 160mph......

    It is pretty easy to calculate the correct speed, as the 0-100kmh time is equivalent to 0-62mph, so 2 x 62 = 124mph LOL.

    Leave a comment:


  • ///Mangler
    replied
    Look at the OG E30 M3. The roof bump, at the back of the roof, specifically makes the air hit the OE rear wing with optimum flow. The added 'adjustable flap' was further evolution of this 'system'. This is why the E30 M3 didn't go to the higher wing for more downforce, the roof bump would have put the airflow under it, and not over the top of it.

    T

    Leave a comment:


  • Arith2
    replied
    Originally posted by Estoril View Post


    I'm doing this from memory - but the 60 lbs of downforce is at 160 MPH IIRC. Citing downforce without the associated speed it tied to has no context in reality. How many of these cars are really (lets not kid ourselves) are driven at 160 mph?

    Less than that, its about aero drag as much as anything else.
    My car saw 140+ often and the extra downforce is very welcome. A full body underbody panel would massively help the downforce and probably reduce drag at the same time. That's a later project when I have more time and the kids get older.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albino09
    replied
    Originally posted by old///MFanatic View Post
    The point is it’s not purely aesthetics.
    Yes the weight savings is another added bonus along with looks. Just to clarify it’s not made of carbon.
    I stand corrected on the material used, but not the rest.

    Leave a comment:


  • old///MFanatic
    replied
    Originally posted by Estoril View Post
    I'm doing this from memory - but the 60 lbs of downforce is at 160 MPH IIRC. Citing downforce without the associated speed it tied to has no context in reality. How many of these cars are really (lets not kid ourselves) are driven at 160 mph?

    Less than that, its about aero drag as much as anything else.
    Good point and true.
    On that point, two earlier BMW articles stated it cut rear lift by 50% @120mph.

    Leave a comment:


  • Estoril
    replied
    Originally posted by Arith2 View Post
    Roof spoilers create separation at the base of the window on our cars making them stupid to use. If it doesn't on whatever car, then it's fine. This is the E46 M3 section though and it sucks. And it's ugly. The CSL trunk adds 60 pounds of downforce without creating a bunch of drag and it's functional on corners without sacrificing the everyday drivability that a giant wing would bring.

    I'm doing this from memory - but the 60 lbs of downforce is at 160 MPH IIRC. Citing downforce without the associated speed it tied to has no context in reality. How many of these cars are really (lets not kid ourselves) are driven at 160 mph?

    Less than that, its about aero drag as much as anything else.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arith2
    replied
    Roof spoilers create separation at the base of the window on our cars making them stupid to use. If it doesn't on whatever car, then it's fine. This is the E46 M3 section though and it sucks. And it's ugly. The CSL trunk adds 60 pounds of downforce without creating a bunch of drag and it's functional on corners without sacrificing the everyday drivability that a giant wing would bring.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slideways
    replied
    Originally posted by bimmerfan08 View Post

    The OE CSL trunk material is a composite, IIRC

    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	312
Size:	92.1 KB
ID:	248971
    BMW probably went with Sheet Moulding Compound over carbon fiber for these reasons: "very high productivity, excellent part reproducibility, cost efficiency and the possibility to realize parts with complex geometries and integrated functions."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X