It's nearly that time to start thinking about fitting my clamshell wings and I haven't the foggiest where they go (apart from the
obvious).
Has anyone on here fitted them? and is it just a case of moving them around till they look nice?
cheers
quote:
Originally posted by flyingkiwi
is it just a case of moving them around till they look nice?
cheers
If you get any decent info / pics it would be apprec. as mine are due for fitting soon.
Does anyone know the usual way of fastening the clams where they attach to the body through the fibreglass itself ? I was thinking about welding in an
extra square tube to the chassis for this.
I guess the overall angle must stay fairly parallel with the ground or we are gonna have a nice aerofoil and a 'steering goes lighter with
speed' effect + broken clams = 
I dunno what I'm going to do about front wings - cycle wings look nice but must add to unsprung weight (how much anybody?) and mean you have to
bung all the supension bolts for SVA. The clamshells look less nice & probably weight lots more overall (data anyone?) but at least i'ts
suspended weight. Who flogs clamshells to us barmy army? Anybody know any alternatives (like a "morgan" look?) (I've asked this before
& the answer was no....)
I tacked my chassis together today so I'm feeling pleased with myself - sorry you didn't want to know that... but it's brought decision
day rather closer!
cheers
Bob C
if it was a weight issue then cycle wings would win every time.
also, they will offer less air reistance.
I think clamshell wings look great on the right car, but its getting that look. They look really bad on the wrong car.
just my tuppence worth
Mark
Have alook in the back of uncle Ron's book (second edition) There's a few examples in there.
There's a really nice one bottom of P184
Just an opinion, but I've seen several examples that looked pretty good, and several that were awful. It all had to do with proper postiioning.
The good looking ones were mounted low, with minmal clearance over the tire. the poor looking ones were mounted too high, looking like an off road
vehicle. Another poor looking example had the trailing edge mounted too low, exagerating the angle of the clam.
Here's a pic of an example I like. The top of the clam is roughly the same as the top of the bonnet. The trailing edge of the wing is pointed
toward the lower edge of the rear wing.
I'd recommend finding an example you like, then examining the the relationship between tire, trailing edge of fender, headlights, and body.
[Edited on 28/1/04 by MustangSix]
I have a copy of westfield build manual. If you want (and if I can) i'll put the page on the net for you to read.
Mark.
Yeah, that would be great if you can. Been tinkering the last couple of day's with possitions and like mustangsix said, they look better closer
to the wheel, without limiting the suspension travel (not as easy as it sounds) with a nice slope to the rear. I've come to the conclusion that
the position to fit them on, is the one you like the look of.
Cheers
Chris
Must admit, I hadn't even considered clamshell wings, but the more I look at the picure mustang's posted, the more I think I might like some....
How many pages did it come on?
Rescued attachment document.jpg
Thanks for both replies guys, for both the normal and far sighted amongst us.
I had to stand 6 ' away from my monitor to read the first, but the thought was there was appreciated.
Bob,
My cycle wings weigh about 1.5lb each
As for sprung weight, you could argue that they will actually contribute to sprung lift!
Air in at the top, ejected at the rear (downwards!) - any aerodynamicists care to comment!
ATB
Simon
quote:
Originally posted by Simon
As for sprung weight, you could argue that they will actually contribute to sprung lift!
Air in at the top, ejected at the rear (downwards!) - any aerodynamicists care to comment!
ATB
Simon
Just another thought that occurs to me - Clamshell wings will avoid a lot of the SVA type problems with radii etc in the suspension components as they
would all be enclosed - is this:
a) correct?
b) wishful thinking?
c) none of the above?
My last kit was robin hood (I know, i know, you learn by your misakes) had clamshells, looked OK but it was reluctant to go over 100mph! (wings
flappen about etc)
peteff
Thanks for the help in the other section, as you can see the offending article has now gone (was it obvious what I was talking about??)
Also thanks for making it smaller and more readable. Not sure what happened, I scanned it in and it looked ok until i put it on the mesage board,
I'll keep pratising though
Thanks again
Mark
My Westy originally came with clams when I bought it. On rough (OK, normal) UK roads, at 'faster' speeds it was verging on frightening to
drive, a real 'both hands on the wheel' experience, as it wandered around the road with a mind of it's own. I tryed countless checks of
the suspension, swapped tyres, checked geometry, all to no avail in an effort to make it more user friendly. Having read about the fact that The
earlier models were meant to have quite a bit of bumpsteer, I put it down to that. Eventually I purchased some cycle wings and got around to fitting
them. At first, I did the one side, and drove it around for a bit like that (yes really). Strangley. the car felt soooo much better. I merely thought
it was my imagination, and the fact that I was distracted by watching the O/S/F wheel bobbing up and down whilst I was driving it When I finally got
round to doing the other side did I realise that it wasnt my imagination after all, it drove like a completely different car! The good old clams were
obviously creating an appreciable amount of lift.......
Ah, so I could indeed become a "flying kiwi". Mind you by the time I finish building this car, all speed limits will be 30mph and you will
not be able to start your car without the government knowing about it so the chances of me achieving take-off speed will be limited to race
track's.