68 replies to this topic

[JG]

looks like they were an add on (i wasn't far wrong )

[The Batman]

pffftt thin air tends to be lighter than most things

Helium would be better.

thats just being silly

[techieboy]

@ techie. If you will buy from barry boys.

Fecker. They were from a Ford main dealer. Although it was in the process of closing down.

Very butch looking, a later model maybe?

No idea. Thought it was a 2006 onwards but the picture JG put up is of a newer one.

[The Batman]

i cant see the photo jg put up

[JG]

Can find lots of those Matt, http://www.amazon.co...r/dp/B005QXOJLW http://www.fordonlin...54_F1477654-657 But no OEM.

[techieboy]

They are OEM. Just from the Ford accessories brochure by the look of it. Guess they swap in, in place of the standard version like Darcini's fitted although look a lot different size wise. Darcini's are much more subtle.

[JG]

Sorry, thats what i meant, the ones that most of the cars came with. I concede that both are oem.

[Winstar]

If you remove this pressure area then a front splitter would become less effective. Not a bad thing on a standard car but not so good for anyone with a big wing?? Although they have a small effect would canards be good here? Lifts the air up on the side of the flat front area??

Only a portion of the down force is due to the pressure acting directly on the spliter most of the down force is created by splitting the flow so it travels over the car rather than under it, as i've said before you'd stuggle to get canards to work on the VX without making it an MOT failure or possibly breaking silhouette regs

I looked at my VX model with rotating wheels over the weekend and you get a similar pattern to this but as the wheel arch gap is MUCH smaller the flow travels round the wheel to a point below the level of the indicator before spilling out of the arch and creating a seperation of flow from the body work. Therfore if you fit the slots a la Joe or smax grills then you should be able to remove the flow seperation and turbulance of this flow joining the flow past the car. However this won't reduce the pressure in the wheel arch caused by the flow deflected up off the front of the wheel, to do this you'll need to also fit the arch vents and i suspect you'll get a bit of benifit from them being further forward but not much. A better reason to stick them up front will be due to less chance of crap/water being thrown up at the front of the wheel.

The more dense the lines the higher the pressure.

Reminds me of Pasta Verde.

No stream lines just show the path of flow from a chosen point thruogh the model

I'm no aerodynamicist, and anyway the louvres on mine were just for show and didn't have corresponding holes in the wheel arch (as someone who always had the roof off, I didn't fancy getting wet every time I drove through a puddle). But if it's any use to anyone, I can say that when the radiator got properly hot (i.e. stuck in stationary traffic for some time) the heat would be streaming out of the louvres after it was parked up -- if anything, more than out of the bonnet mesh.

As such, I would presume that at speed, there is considerable additional airflow entering through the front grill, passing over the radiator, and coming out of the louvres (as well as out of the bonnet mesh). This might mess up any calculations, unless you are going to duct the air from the wheel arch liner hole to the louvres.

Ahh ok so it can help with cooling then too!! I'm liking this more and more

You really need to seperate the wheel arch flow from the bonnet as you risk pressurising the bonnet or creating a less restictive path therefrore reducing the flow through the rads at speed which is the last thing you want.

[MartinS]

Checked out the ford S Max ones a while back and they wont fit due to curving, there are also ones on Mitsu evos and RX8's plus a few others.

Martin s