Sooooo... What was the purpose of fender scoops...? ***VOTE in added Poll***

[xs29j8Bullitt]

The drawings below are not meant to be contentious – but are just to aid in the discovery process.

<snip>

Let's just enjoy this process; this does not need to be a bad thing.

Dane

No problem Dane... Its great to have someone else sketching too... My sketches are to demonstrate a concept only. not true layouts by any means!

As I stated when  posted the first one:

Here is my best guess at how the fender scoops may have helped tire clearance... not to scale sketch only...

Also, the previous sections that I posted were accidentally left two degrees rotated, so they were not quite as far off as it appeared.  Again, my postings are conceptual sketches only... no data to do a layout!

Two more sketches:

(1)  Section through both front wheel centerlines during hard banking turn on a surface with a bank angle of about 25 degrees...

(2)  Potential tire damage from the forward edge of the cutout opening.

[C5X DAYTONA]

The mule was just that..  A mule.   And I would defiantly call those one purpose air extractors on the mule. Not for clearance at all..  I also do call the vents on the production Daytona vents too.    My opinion is that when they took the car to the wind tunnel they thought they had made enough room and were interested in making areo and down force. 

I see both sides of the extractor, clearance issue.       I got to know George Wallace and even Bob McCurry quite well and I greatly enjoyed the many times I spent with them and the storys they told me.   So you can send over the FBI..     I am not changing my mind unless they say so..    

Sean, your opinion on this matter is very close to mine...  I voted for #4 on the poll (Aero design intent, minor tire clearance improvement with NASCAR mods).  Not having the correct racing parts on hand to evaluate makes analysis of the tire clearance issue very difficult.

You are very fortunate to have gotten to know the Chrysler employees involved in that era, and I have no intention of trying to discredit any of them.  My main interest in the subject is technical in nature, but I also have tired of the mocking and disrespectful way in which the subject is often discussed.  Your input on this has been clear, reasoned, and respectful... and I very much appreciate your participation in this thread.  

Funny,  I voted #3.     Tire clearance AND Aero improvements by design from the start.   Because of the comments from Wallace and Rathgeib about the clearance issue they were worried about.  Which was probably after the first drawing of the Daytona.  That is my thought.   Yes, Wallace went into quite detail about his life and work accomplishments.   He is a Genius in every since of the word.    Buddy Baker did called him the human computer.    The guy could touch the pavement at the track and he would have the blueprints of the track and tell you what tire, spring, shock package you would need for the specific car they were running..  He even told me the top secret (proprietary) additive to B&M Quick Shift trans fluid and so on and so on.  You would   if I told you.   Also for Chrysler he would see what gear the car had,  What tire the car had,  What trans it had and other misc options and usage's the car was to be used for and then tell you what pulley on the fan it needed after days on calculations in his office.  I am not kidding.  These are the things he did.  Things we can do from our iphone in 1/2 second.   They would run laps and he would take notes and even photos of what the car was doing at speed and he would go to his room and not come out till the next day with his answer or state that we need more info.     This thread starts out,  what is the purpose of the scoops?    I am going off the origins of how it started.    Not where it went..    Also,  they were not thinking about brake cooling at Daytona and Talladega.  That is for sure.    Off subject here but on the brake heat topic the wing car was not meant to run Riverside or any road courses.  But it did well there at Riverside.    Jack McCoy told me once that when they showed up for the 1970 January race at Riverside, he thought all the wing car guys were nuts.    The cars were longer and that is one of the enemies of a road course.  Then Jack said,  I was in my Charger and the Bird's and Daytona's were blowing by me on back straight.   You bet we had a Daytona there for the June race.   He actually qualified 4th next to Isaac.   He even told me how he called Chrysler to get some Daytona parts and Chrysler sent them for free to the local Dodge Dealer for them to pick up..  Maybe charged shipping,  not sure.    Bill Conn (before he passed actually about 2 weeks before Jack) still had all the paperwork on that deal.   Back on the subject here,    I totally understand the fact of what the vents do.  Nothing to do with clearance,  especially after 70 Daytona 500.    But again,  I am going of what I and many others were told by Engineers themselves.  I know we can contact Myth Buster but really?  It's not much of a myth is it?    Again.  The quote the Chrysler Engineers say is,  the Ford guys thought they were extractors and that is what we called them.  But they were for clearance on the right front only.   Wallace did also say,  why not take advantage of the aero on what we were doing there.     It's great stuff.    It really is.    

[ACUDANUT]

I can't vote..You failed to add a vote block for Ventilation. 

Okay.  ...

[C5X DAYTONA]

Here is the actual front end to the Jack McCoy #7 Daytona which ran in the 1970 Daytona 500.   The cut fender edge under the vent is bent up and was riveted to the scoop.   There was no way for the tire to be cut on any edges on the cut part of the fender.  Sorry it's a bad picture.  It was sitting in the back of the shop in a dark room.    I can email a bigger picture to anyone.  

[C5X DAYTONA]

I worked with Larry Rathgeb for many years on the Viper Project...he was our suspension development Engineer. I asked him the same question many years ago, and he said the scoop was there for tire clearance reasons only! I am sure they were hoping for an aero advantage, it just didn't happen.

Thank you for the input.  I feel like I am marching to the beat of a mute drum on this subject.    Was that the Viper the last project Larry worked on?   I talked to Larry some 10 years ago and he said it was.

[xs29j8Bullitt]

Here is the actual front end to the Jack McCoy #7 Daytona which ran in the 1970 Daytona 500.   The cut fender edge under the vent is bent up and was riveted to the scoop.   There was no way for the tire to be cut on any edges on the cut part of the fender.  Sorry it's a bad picture.  It was sitting in the back of the shop in a dark room.    I can email a bigger picture to anyone.  

Please email me a larger version... uncompressed if possible.

Thanks Sean!

[hemiviper588]

Larry retired after his stint with Viper...he is doing well, in fact he is Pheasant hunting with some friends as we speak!

[C5X DAYTONA]

The drawings below are not meant to be contentious – but are just to aid in the discovery process.

I hope that none of this gets people upset. People should be allowed to question and get answers. There are no accusations involved in any of the questions. There are no personal attacks on anyone. No one is lying here and there is no conspiracy. I have known engineer's from Ford (grads of Art Center College Deign) who were apart of teams that designed the Mustang. Teams build cars. Not everyone knows the reasoning for what another team member or group does. They may get told many things in the development process. Do we know the actual engineer who designed the fender scoop? There is no documentation that says the scoops are for tire clearance. This is the typical tension between physical evidence and witnesses. Sometimes they don't add up for many reasons. I have worked on my own car and can't remember why I did something (Smile).

I am coming to understand the tire clearance thing better from my own drawing and geometry from my car. I still have questions that would scare me to death driving if that tire traveled that far with sharp steel edges exposed. You don't cut wholes in fenders to fix one half of the equation.

All we have to do is see if someone who has a race Daytona to put a load on the top and jack in down to see where the tire would hit.

To me it is a part of life to question – even people's experiences – that is how things get tested and proven. There is nothing personal about it. I have no problem discovering I'm wrong about my questions. I just like the discovery process, but I also know some people don't.







My feelings are that the tire clearance was solved even under the heavier loads because there were no reports of it being a problem after that (68). We have facts that show air flow and improvements in aerodynamics are the reason for the scoops, and we have the infamous name "exhausters".  The test mule was the K & K car that hit 200 -  they would have had issues of rubbing if that was true. Do you test a car a low speeds to see if you're your high speed effects work?

M y point is that the scoops are for aero reasons. Secondary effects may have entered to picture and this is under question and can be proven true or false. Does anyone have the dimensions of the race suspension? Any parts measurements. This can be simulated.

Let's just enjoy this process; this does not need to be a bad thing.

Dane

Dane,  The engineers are alive.   THEY TALK..    I am giving names,  Not the this guy said stuff.    If you talked to them it was not areo first on the scoop.  It really was not in this RF scoop.   Safety was first and then lets make it aero.    And yes you do build a slow speed car first.  A mule..     You don't go 200mph back then out of the box.   It's a process of try this, try that back then.  They didn't have 100 years of automobile technology backing them up.  Just their experiences.  No computers,  No handbooks,  Nobody had ever been were they were.   They wanted to make sure the had the clearance issue fixed on the RF fender.  They didn't with the hood  but did with the fender..   They could not modify the fender top on the 68.  They could with the Daytona.   They just didn't want it to be an issue.  It still hit the hood.  Yes it did for the second time.  A computer program would of caught that.  Yes..    These are humans bending and forging metal and risking their life.   George Wallace even took a piece of welding rod,  welded it to a upper a-arm and put numbers on it.  There was a hole in the fender and the rod was sticking out of it.   He said they would make high speed laps and he would try to take pictures of the numbers on the rod sticking out the fender (while hanging on to the roll bar with no seat) as they were going around the track.  That was one way he would know what bar to run.   This is real stuff.  There is even published pictures of him doing similar stunts with all the streamers on the car.   This stuff is unheard of today.    They really risked their lives in the name of winning.    Can you imagine what they were trying to do back then?    They really were going places nobody had ever been.  On the race track of course.   They got the 200MPH mark they wanted.  They beat Ford.  Well I think Plymouth did that better with Hamilton.   Which was really amazing he did it to think about it.  Those were 2 ton cars with 9 inch wheels and bias ply tires.   I do race a 69 Daytona.  With the exact same combo except for the weight.   And let me tell you.  They are a handful.  I do personally road race with bias ply blue streaks on 9 inch wheels.   I am totally a 60s junky.   But I am a ninny that I run power steering.   My buddies say I should work out and get manual steer.       In my eyes one of the most amazing times for Grand National racing. (NASCAR) today.   I think you and some others are all looking at the Daytona as if it was going to be built today.  We have 40 years of experience since then.  You have to look at it in their shoes and where they came from and what they had to work with.     Hope I am not posting to much?  Not much of chatty Internet one.   So I thought..  But, I just have seen this debate for years.   Nobody listens to the engineers and what their concerns were of the time (late 60s) which is what we are talking about.  It is not what it would do today...    It is obvious that the vents were better vent/extractor than it was for clearance to me.   I keep stating that.  But the engineers wanted to MAKE SURE there was no clearance issue.   That is a fact.    We can spend millions of dollars testing it and we don't need to.   They already did.    The purpose of the scoop was for clearance from the beginning.   The aero was a secondary thought on this item.   Really..   My reason for the scoop being 1st is in how in chronological order how they came to be in what I and many others were told by the actual engineers from Chrysler.  I think this it the 3rd time I have said this in this post.    Of course with today's science we would of built it on a computer first and not had to iron out all the labor of build and re-build and this would of never been an issue.   I have been trying to explain the process of how the vents came to be.   Not what it IS....  Now everyone keeps looking at the hood.   They didn't think it was going to hit then.  But it did on the #88 car.       You say it yourself.  The other engineers don't tell on what they are doing.   EXACTLY...   Ford guys thought the Mopar teem were after ventilation.   That was not the primary focus.  Do you get this?    George Wallace actually laughed at it.   He said,  The Ford people called them vents.  So did we...   Do you get it?     David Pearson thought,  Look at the dumb wings.  That won't work.  Then after they raced.  He said,  I thought to myself.  They really do work.   Remember, Pearson didn't have a computer.  Just what he thought in his head.    this was all uncharted territory back then.  Everyone thought it was a clown car or space ship till it ran.   McCurry even hated the first drawing that Pointer did.   Pointer didn't McCurry a computer generated image of a Daytona.  Pointer drew a picture.  See my point.  They did stuff from experience and put their thoughts to use.  Of course today,  EVERYTHING would be different and would be done with different meanings.      Really,  I do love the banter but most of us on here is not stepping back in time at what they were doing and had been doing to make them think the way they did.      Some here keep looking at this with today perspective.  Stop it..       I was just thinking,  If you talk/type too much nobody will be paying attention.   Man I hope that is not the case with this topic..

[C5X DAYTONA]

Larry retired after his stint with Viper...he is doing well, in fact he is Pheasant hunting with some friends as we speak!

Awesome.   That is very good to hear he is in good health.   That group of men have been the nicest to all of us.     He has said to me before that he really didn't think about the history they were working on these cars.  They were just doing a job.     He really liked how everyone was so interested in their hay day.   I have a letter from Bob McCurry thinking me for my time and the photos I had of his days at Dodge.. What a great group of people.   McCurry would call me and tell me to get my butt down to the local Lexus dealer and hang out with him..  And to bring one of his cars.   He called the Daytona (his car.)   When I was with George at Talladega,  George and Larry were going over their home values.   Wallace had left Chrysler in 71 and moved to California and worked for B&M.   Larry had made a comment that his home was worth the same as it did when Wallace left and Wallace's house was like 10x what he paid..   Are you still with Chrysler?  Working on the new Viper?   I saw the new record at Nurnburgring.  7.12    That put a big smile on my face. 

[C5X DAYTONA]

Here is the actual front end to the Jack McCoy #7 Daytona which ran in the 1970 Daytona 500.   The cut fender edge under the vent is bent up and was riveted to the scoop.   There was no way for the tire to be cut on any edges on the cut part of the fender.  Sorry it's a bad picture.  It was sitting in the back of the shop in a dark room.    I can email a bigger picture to anyone.  

Please email me a larger version... uncompressed if possible.

Thanks Sean!

I sent it.  Please let me know if you get it.   I tried to send through the member contact info but I could not get the page to work. 

[Daytona Guy]

I did some mock ups (two dimensional) using my car and some pics of the suspension. My discovery is this...

Venting seems to have been on the minds of the aero engineers because the test mule's vents have no though of tire clearance. Yet, on the minds of the builders/mechanical engineers there was a known tire clearance issue that needed to be addressed.

In the testing of the Daytona the idea of lowering the car gave it more stability. This would require the fenders to be bubbled. This also created some problems. Lowering the car changed the suspension. By adjusting the upper control arm out (or lengthening it) can make up for this adjustment (camber), but makes the car as it is already under a load just sitting still. Since the upper control arm is shorter than the lower (and the car is lowered) makes the tire travel up more extreme (pulls the tire in at the top) than normal.

Now,  get the car moving and under a load the tire does not have to travel very far up and the tire begins to angle more than usual,  because the upper control arm is shorter than the lower the geometry pulls the top of the tire in – already towards the end of its limits. 

The other discovery is that the lower control arm has limits to its movement up. It stops on the frame of the car. This stop can guarantee the tire can't move up past a certain point.  This can give the engineers comfort in cutting a hole and leaving exposed sharp edges where it is impossible for the tire to reach.  Let's say they only need .5" because after that the suspension can't physically past that point. Allowing for tire expansion and flexing they came up with a 5' inch diameter hole,  only needing .25" of extra tire clearance up. 

Notice the difference - The suspension on the Daytona is as if it is under a load sitting still. My bet is that they made an adjestment on the torsion bar to keep it loaded, because lowering the car makes if softer.




The hood clearance issue is still a problem I can't figure out. It may be that after the car was lowered and the camber changed it only had one point of contact (the fender).

Can this come down to engineer ownership. Can both tire clearance and aero efficiency be true? The Aero engineers are seeing the benefits, and the mechanical engineers are seeing their benefits. Two groups taking two separate paths end up at the same point. The planets lines up 

Cars after the Daytona would have never benefited for the added venting because they could not handle the stance the Daytona enjoyed because of its dynamics.

Dane

[C5X DAYTONA]

I did some mock ups (two dimensional) using my car and some pics of the suspension. My discovery is this...

Venting seems to have been on the minds of the aero engineers because the test mule's vents have no though of tire clearance. Yet, on the minds of the builders/mechanical engineers there was a known tire clearance issue that needed to be addressed.

In the testing of the Daytona the idea of lowering the car gave it more stability. This would require the fenders to be bubbled. This also created some problems. Lowering the car changed the suspension. By adjusting the upper control arm out (or lengthening it) can make up for this adjustment (camber), but makes the car as it is already under a load just sitting still. Since the upper control arm is shorter than the lower (and the car is lowered) makes the tire travel up more extreme (pulls the tire in at the top) than normal.

Now,  get the car moving and under a load the tire does not have to travel very far up and the tire begins to angle more than usual,  because the upper control arm is shorter than the lower the geometry pulls the top of the tire in – already towards the end of its limits. 

The other discovery is that the lower control arm has limits to its movement up. It stops on the frame of the car. This stop can guarantee the tire can't move up past a certain point.  This can give the engineers comfort in cutting a hole and leaving exposed sharp edges where it is impossible for the tire to reach.  Let's say they only need .5" because after that the suspension can't physically past that point. Allowing for tire expansion and flexing they came up with a 5' inch diameter hole,  only needing .25" of extra tire clearance up. 

Notice the difference - The suspension on the Daytona is as if it is under a load sitting still. My bet is that they made an adjustment on the torsion bar to keep it loaded, because lowering the car makes if softer.




The hood clearance issue is still a problem I can't figure out. It may be that after the car was lowered and the camber changed it only had one point of contact (the fender).

Can this come down to engineer ownership. Can both tire clearance and aero efficiency be true? The Aero engineers are seeing the benefits, and the mechanical engineers are seeing their benefits. Two groups taking two separate paths end up at the same point. The planets lines up 

Cars after the Daytona would have never benefited for the added venting because they could not handle the stance the Daytona enjoyed because of its dynamics.

Dane

You wrote:    Venting seems to have been on the minds of the aero engineers because the test mule's vents have no though of tire clearance. Yet, on the minds of the builders/mechanical engineers there was a known tire clearance issue that needed to be addressed.

Me:  The original drawing that I posted earlier that Pointer gave to McCurry has NO EXTRACTORS.    Theory.. When they show the drawing to the mechanical engineers they said.  Tire problems up front for sure...  As they just ran into it the year before..  Yes the mule has tiny extractors.  Possible that the mechanical guys said.  Pointer,  We need a tire to go up there just in case.   Pointer gives that ugly mule scoop back to Ford  and makes a beautiful work of art.   Also if you look at the mule everything is crude, flat....  mock up stuff.  Flat.   Nothing that was used.  Just the ideas.

You Wrote:  The other discovery is that the lower control arm has limits to its movement up. It stops on the frame of the car. This stop can guarantee the tire can't move up past a certain point.

Me:  Yes the arm has it mechanical limit on a race car.  There are rubber bumpers on a street car..  BUT you never want to find the mechanical limit of a control arm when you are racing...  EVER..  You DON'T wants the suspension to EVER bottom out.  I can't say that more loudly.    That is a bad bad thing.  The car can bottom but NEVER the suspension.   When you are going 200+ I am talking about..    Yes the control arm will stop somewhere but you don't want it to do it..  You will break a spindle/bend a control arm and who knows where you go from there.

I do agree,  You have at least 2 groups of engineers trying to build a car.  Also it was just a very small group of guys.  Bob McCurry even said to Pointer,   Build the car if you think it will win.  If anyone gets in your way, send them to me and keep working.      Design was not happy about not having a say either.    But the engineers are very adamant about it was for clearance.  FIRST....   And they say only for clearance too.     I do think Pointer was thinking about the areo possibilities he could do with it..  That was his expertise.     I know in my head that Pointer took that thought to drawing boards and to the wind tunnel for what we have on the finished product.    Basically,  I think in this order..   Pointer draws car.     (no extractors)   Mechanical guys say,  Need to put humps in the top of the fender since you Pointer say there will be more down force.  Pointer goes back and puts on little extractors.  Then the mechanical guys say,  Really Pointer?   We are not using donuts for tires..   Make sure there is enough room on the top outside of that fender.   Pointer then goes back and makes one bitchen vent in fit and function.    Now have you ever seen a more beautiful vent on a car ever?  Well maybe the 1/4 Scoops on a 69 Coronet.  The optional ones....       Remember they were on a crash program to beat Ford at the new Talladega race track.   They had to be there with the new car..  That was mandatory...   

[C5X DAYTONA]

The hood clearance issue is still a problem I can't figure out. It may be that after the car was lowered and the camber changed it only had one point of contact (the fender).

Can this come down to engineer ownership. Can both tire clearance and aero efficiency be true? The Aero engineers are seeing the benefits, and the mechanical engineers are seeing their benefits. Two groups taking two separate paths end up at the same point. The planets lines up  

Cars after the Daytona would have never benefited for the added venting because they could not handle the stance the Daytona enjoyed because of its dynamics.

Dane

[/quote]  I personally don't think they expected the tire to hood problem..   My thoughts are on how the vent came to be by what the engineers say.     I think it is totally possable that both clearance and aero efficiency were going on at once.   But the engineers had to have the extra room for security 1st.   I think that the aero guys played with it after that.   A vent is more usefull than a hump on the fender over the tire and so on.       It is possible too that Chrysler didn't want to modify the structural integrity of the hood since it was a finished product.   Well basically finished.  They Daytona doesn't have the ribs in the front of hood.  But the sides of the hood were more than likely off limits to modify..       Funny, thinking about this what I do with my wife I just say,  Your right honey and turn my head and roll my eyes...       I think I have said all I can say about this.    Hemiviper, Pettybird and others all say the samething too.  Funny,  the ones who have not meet the group is not believing them..  Doug,  Where are you?  lol..     I am not trying to convert anyone.  But really,    I think we are looking to hard for this needle when it is right in front of us..   They have said the same thing over and over and over again..   They have nothing to hid..  Really,  there is no benefit for them to lie..   You can talk to them in which some of us have and for the past 35 years they say the exact thing over and over again.      Man, I know looking at it gives you another idea but they wanted the clearance first.   The aero part was a secondary thought that was probably more important in the end.  But the initial idea was for clearance.        

[Daytona Guy]

You:)   Yes the arm has it mechanical limit on a race car.  There are rubber bumpers on a street car..  BUT you never want to find the mechanical limit of a control arm when you are racing...  EVER..  You DON'T wants the suspension to EVER bottom out.  I can't say that more loudly.    That is a bad bad thing.  The car can bottom but NEVER the suspension.   When you are going 200+ I am talking about..    Yes the control arm will stop somewhere but you don't want it to do it..  You will break a spindle/bend a control arm and who knows where you go from there.

Me: Just look at the lower control arm (not on a street car). It will hit the frame if they travel too far up (not far). The only way around this is to cut the frame away. (does someone have a pic) I'm not and never have been talking about a stock front lower control arm. I'm not saying that it was OK to hit the frame, or that it hits the frame, it just could not go past that point (that gave assurances). This guaranteed the tire had a limit on how far it could go up. Take your pick, it will either bottom out the shock or the lower control arm on the frame. That is what I observe. Look at the shocks - what am I missing? All I am saying is that the travel upward had a limit.

I hope I made it clear that I see the tire clearance issue now - once I could see how it could work. It is just the way I work, once I see it - I get it. That is why I'm glad you guys are willing to work through this with those of us who never got it because it did not look like it could be done - just having a stock body and not seeing the track car - it seemed laughable that the scoops were for tire clearance. Now I can see it. Thanks for your patience.

Just a guess - but I have always thought that they used these in their thinking up the design the of fender scoops. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought this.



Dane

[C5X DAYTONA]

Funny,  Sorry for my You: Me: post.      I am not a computer guy and could not figure out how to break down the question and answer them from what I know or my thoughts.  I do know how to right click, copy and paste...  You may laugh at me for that.    I am sure I look like a dork with the computer literate, but that was the only way I could do it in my world...

On the race cars,  the car will bottom out on the track before the suspension bottoms out on the frame or exhaust.  Just like in todays Cup cars.   That is why you see the sparks during the night races.    Another problem that was coming up with the Daytona was bending one of the arms.  Can't remember if it was the lower or upper.   The cars had so much downforce on the superspeedways that they never experienced before.   There were issues with some drivers momentarily blacking out too.   That is one thing about the Daytona and the Superbird.  They were the cars that changed the rule book more than any other car.  It really was a game changer.   The cars were just too fast for the technology they had.  Especially when it came to tires.    Can you imagine even if you left the Daytona/Superbird body alone and just gave it all today's technology in the chassis/running gear department.   They really are special cars.    The drivers really liked the fact that you could point the car where ever you wanted it to go and it went there.    That was something they really didn't have before.  Plus the fact that they never went that fast before..   What a great time in American automotive history to be an engineer.   I know I would of had one heck of a blast.  I do now playing with my Daytona now and dialing it is for faster laps times is fun and a challenge.   Expensive but fun..  

I totally agree with the,  It looks like a vent/extractor,  it works like one,  it is called one and it smells like one.  It is wild that it is actually for tire clearance insurance as the primary function.     I hope I have not sounded like a jerk or said things 20 times.  But even as a young pup and sitting there with Rathgeib, Romberg and others from Chrysler listening to them tell us what was really going on and I was actually really interested even as a kid.   I know my father has made comments before that he didn't think I was paying attention.

I still laugh when Mr. Wallace asked me about the right and then left vent and I said, Clearance? on the left too.     I was not sure about the left one.   And he said, nope, it not for clearance on the left.   It would look dumb with just the right one.   That will stick in my head till the day I die.   His chuckle cracks me up.


I was going to say the Ram Charger hood was one of my favorites too but I did love the 1/4 scoop design (even though it didn't do anything) better.     Yep,  It does look like a reversed scoop on the Daytona but it is of a different design.   Rises more rapidly on the Daytona.

[oldcarnut]

Have been reading this thread and just ran across this article while searching for something else.  Not posting for any arguments for or against just thought the article would make for an interesting read.  Has a member or two cars pictured and anothers aviator.

http://americanclassicars.com/dodge-daytona-and-plymouth-superbird/

"John Arruzza explains some of the things that had to be done to make a Charger into a Daytona: "The nose cone is sheet metal. The headlight doors are fiberglass. They used a '70 model Charger fender and hood because the' 70 model Charger was going to come out with the wrap around bumper, which gave perfect place to line up the nose cone." The little bumps on the Daytona's fenders served an important purpose, too. "Chrysler had holes in the tops of the fenders to release air trapped in the front fenders at high speed. They really didn't want the Ford camp or the Chevy camp to realize that's what they were for so they came up with the story that the tires were rubbing and they needed to cut a hole in the fender for the tire. That was not actually the case. They really did speed the car up by releasing trapped air from inside the fender."

[C5X DAYTONA]

Have been reading this thread and just ran across this article while searching for something else.  Not posting for any arguments for or against just thought the article would make for an interesting read.  Has a member or two cars pictured and anothers aviator.

http://americanclassicars.com/dodge-daytona-and-plymouth-superbird/

"John Arruzza explains some of the things that had to be done to make a Charger into a Daytona: "The nose cone is sheet metal. The headlight doors are fiberglass. They used a '70 model Charger fender and hood because the' 70 model Charger was going to come out with the wrap around bumper, which gave perfect place to line up the nose cone." The little bumps on the Daytona's fenders served an important purpose, too. "Chrysler had holes in the tops of the fenders to release air trapped in the front fenders at high speed. They really didn't want the Ford camp or the Chevy camp to realize that's what they were for so they came up with the story that the tires were rubbing and they needed to cut a hole in the fender for the tire. That was not actually the case. They really did speed the car up by releasing trapped air from inside the fender."

I don't think John said the headlight door are fiberglass.  They are plastic.  That is a case of the author misspeaking.     The article says about 250 of the Daytona's made it to dealers.  They pretty much all made it to dealers, sales shows and a few company cars.  Cars were even passed on to some drivers.   I think 1 or 2 are still missing.  But they have been found in stock (1 burnt and cut in half) condition.    Half the cars went racing?       Chrysler sold Body in Whites.  There was no need to purchase a complete car.  Unless in some emergence they need body parts.    On the vents,  John has said that many times the clearance issue was not real..  The engineers say exactly the opposite.  They like the fact that Ford thought they were for ventilation.   They even chuckle about it.   Are they retarded?  I don't think so.  The original intent was clearance.  The after affect is totally 100% ventilation.    They were not running around saying clearance to Ford..    They called them vents....      What I am trying to beat in some heads  Chrysler engineers wanted clearance on the RF  FIRST..     Also There was NO Chevy camp..  Unless we are talking about the cars at the rear of the field to please Bill France...      GM offered absolutely NO competition to Ford and Chrysler those days.   That is not a joke either... They didn't..   

[pettybird]

Doug,  Where are you?  lol..    

He's deep inside the DSAC bunker, drinking heavily and shouting expletives at the wall.


Do you get the feeling that the people who don't want to listen to what we say are looking at us like we're stoned hippies who claim we were at Woodstock?  You had to BE there, man...

[C5X DAYTONA]

Doug,  Where are you?  lol..    

He's deep inside the DSAC bunker, drinking heavily and shouting expletives at the wall.


Do you get the feeling that the people who don't want to listen to what we say are looking at us like we're stoned hippies who claim we were at Woodstock?  You had to BE there, man...

 Where do you come up with this stuff?     Some keep looking at the finished product and not how it came to be.   It's all good.   It is just one of those things that has always rung in my head.  The words of the engineers.    George Wallace, would probably just schrug is shoulder and say fine believe what you want but I can't stop for some reason...   Like you and pretty much everyone else on here, we love these cars.  I just don't understand the (it can't be) thought after all the grilling..    But that's cool.. I guess..      

[FJ5WING]

While following along with this thread from about the second day I have been behind the tire clearence reasoning as thats what I heard many moons ago. But I began to wonder if the clearence was just smoke to mislead the competition as the pressure relief argument sure was sounding more and more legitimate. 

now I see this and am buying tickets to the "pressure relief train".........

[moparstuart]

so, is this going to come down to a show me and then only believable......start a chip in to get the funds, pick a car and go to the tunnel and if you can get some of the old engineers there even better.

Sounds like a good meet activity.......lol

That's why I said let Mythbusters have at it- at THEIR cost. I'm sure with the resources they have they could come up with a viable plan.

Although a good meet activity sounds like a great idea as well. 

Or the History Detectives show... 

love that show  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCBRohCCewM

[xs29j8Bullitt]

Here is the actual front end to the Jack McCoy #7 Daytona which ran in the 1970 Daytona 500.   The cut fender edge under the vent is bent up and was riveted to the scoop.   There was no way for the tire to be cut on any edges on the cut part of the fender.  Sorry it's a bad picture.  It was sitting in the back of the shop in a dark room.    I can email a bigger picture to anyone.  

Please email me a larger version... uncompressed if possible.

Thanks Sean!

I sent it.  Please let me know if you get it.   I tried to send through the member contact info but I could not get the page to work. 

Sean -  I received your email with the photo attached, but it was the same 32 Kb version that you posted.  What is the file size of the original pic/scan?  Try attaching it to an email that is already created and ready to go, instead of using the "email pic" function which may be setup to automatically resize it when it is sent.

BTW -  I am just now emerging from a visit back to the distant past...  I lost Internet service shortly after requesting the picture (at about 7:30 PM on Saturday evening), and have only started to have some connectivity in the last hour... having been offline for over 39 hours.  Even now the connection is only for a minute or so at a time.  I have been reporting Internet service problems to my ISP (Charter... aka "those Bast@rds") for nearly two months.  It is now being handled through their supervisors, and a tech is supposed to be here early tomorrow morning to fix it...   AND, to top off the weekend, the sub-division lost electrical power for over 14 hours after some light showers... about the 20 th outage we have had THIS YEAR!  OnCor is the electrical power delivery company in the area... those  #%@&*$#Q&@s!

[C5X DAYTONA]

 

While following along with this thread from about the second day I have been behind the tire clearence reasoning as thats what I heard many moons ago. But I began to wonder if the clearence was just smoke to mislead the competition as the pressure relief argument sure was sounding more and more legitimate. 

now I see this and am buying tickets to the "pressure relief train".........

   

[xs29j8Bullitt]

Can this come down to engineer ownership. Can both tire clearance and aero efficiency be true? The Aero engineers are seeing the benefits, and the mechanical engineers are seeing their benefits. Two groups taking two separate paths end up at the same point. The planets lines up  

Me:  The original drawing that I posted earlier that Pointer gave to McCurry has NO EXTRACTORS.    Theory.. When they show the drawing to the mechanical engineers they said.  Tire problems up front for sure...  As they just ran into it the year before..  Yes the mule has tiny extractors.  Possible that the mechanical guys said.  Pointer,  We need a tire to go up there just in case.   Pointer gives that ugly mule scoop back to Ford   and makes a beautiful work of art.   Also if you look at the mule everything is crude, flat....  mock up stuff.  Flat.   Nothing that was used.  Just the ideas.

<snip>

I do agree,  You have at least 2 groups of engineers trying to build a car.  Also it was just a very small group of guys.  Bob McCurry even said to Pointer,   Build the car if you think it will win.  If anyone gets in your way, send them to me and keep working.      Design was not happy about not having a say either.    But the engineers are very adamant about it was for clearance.  FIRST....   And they say only for clearance too.     I do think Pointer was thinking about the areo possibilities he could do with it..  That was his expertise.     I know in my head that Pointer took that thought to drawing boards and to the wind tunnel for what we have on the finished product.    Basically,  I think in this order..   Pointer draws car.     (no extractors)   Mechanical guys say,  Need to put humps in the top of the fender since you Pointer say there will be more down force.  Pointer goes back and puts on little extractors.  Then the mechanical guys say,  Really Pointer?   We are not using donuts for tires..   Make sure there is enough room on the top outside of that fender.   Pointer then goes back and makes one bitchen vent in fit and function.    

Very definitely possible...  competing Engineering requirements from different Engineering groups is the norm...

Although my college courses prepared me for a career as an Aerodynamics Analyst,  my entire career was spent in design... Structural, Mechanical Systems, & Hydraulic Systems.  I had an offer from Boeing to be an Aerodynamics Analyst, but took a Mechanical Design job offer from Fairchild in order to stay in Texas.

The design tradeoffs between Engineering disciplines existed at every company that I worked at.  For example, I was the Lead Engineer on the Dee Howard TR7000CX Thrust Reverser developed for Cessna's Citation X (Ten) and was constantly having to negotiate (or mediate) different design requirements from the various Engineering disciplines involved.  And clearances were always a major issue requiring extensive tolerance analysis.

Extensive testing was also required, and I was heavily involved in that as well.  Inexpensive and innovative measurement techniques like Sean describes Mr Wallace using were extensively utilized to check/verify clearances.

The first three pics below show Citation X thrust reverser under development and testing.  The fourth pic shows what can happen if tolerance accumulation is not adequately controlled.  After this incident I was tasked with designing a retrofitable fix and a production redesign.

My point of this off-topic excursion is that I understand clearances, and have extensive Mechanical Systems design practical experience, much of it before the advent of CATIA and other computer software aids were available.

My recent sketches were intended to bolster the possibility that tire clearances were a design consideration, and my request for a larger picture was made because the flanges mentioned may well be evidence of tire clearance being a factor.  Any sign on the underside of the fender of tire contact?

[C5X DAYTONA]

Awesome stuff.  My grandfather was Program Manager for the B-1B.   He was under contract with Grumman, Lockheed, Boeing at one time or another.   He was one of the designers or the one (not sure) the wing structure at the cabin on the B17.   I know he worked on the JATO's mount too.   He designed a of the quick release hydraulic fittings on not sure which one but the wings were removible or folded up.    My aunt has the paper thinking him for his invention.  Since he was undercontract he didn't get no big payoff for all is skills.    Seeing your pictures reminds me of the stuff he would show me that worked on.     The 747 stall test he showed me with the wings looking like they were strait up was incredible..   Totally off subject but reminded me of my grandfather.   Sorry to all the other guys who read this...            That is a photograph I took of the McCoy front end.   I put it on my scanner and copied it.   Is there a better way?    Remember,  I am using rotary phone technology here   ..