Quote:
Originally Posted by Teretonga
My argument is that the cost and effort that goes into aero development of such aero development would be better spent and more relevant to automotive engineering, both in the end result and the training of people, if it was focused more on engineering skills than wind tunnel exploitation.
You won't stop dominant periods outright, but mechanical engineering solutions are easier to assimilate than aerodynamic underbody advantage
|
I don't think this is true. The vast majority of road cars do not use hydraulic suspension unlike previous generation Grand Prix cars, manufacturers who championed it like Citroen and Austin have abandoned it. There is only McLaren but even they substitute rudimentary steel suspension in base model McLarens.
Meanwhile every road car is styled to reduce aerodynamic drag, especially those like the Tatra T87 and in the modern day Hyundai Ioniq 6 and Mercedes EQS.
The FIA removed hydraulic suspension elements or front-rear interconnects and so on expressly because it was hard for them to determine the function and to police the legality of it.
Meanwhile aerodynamic surfaces are simple,it's just your pressure distribution and flow field (sharp edges shed vortices, it's all very simple). Easy. Change the shape a little bit and your pressure distribution changes a little bit. Too easy.