Daytona aluminum wing

[Daytona Guy]

I am putting in another order for an aluminum wing. I like to stay ahead of game for my next project. I have a few people already on board and I have room for two more. After this I am done for about 6 years in casting these. (I hope) interested e-mail me DGjesdal@aol.com The cost is $650.00. + shipping. I do this to help cloners. They will be fresh out of the foundry.

"Thallium"on his wing -

[Daytona R/T SE]

How much prep work is required on these wings? I'm assuming they are just the bare castings, with no holes drilled and no hardware-got a pic of what they look like?  Tell me about the casting shrinkage and just how much difference (dimensionally) there is betwwen your wing and a stock one...

[Daytona Guy]

Tabe is sitting on one. (Above) For pics ask Tabe or Big block Sam to post a pic of theirs. I do not have any pics of them. The only piece that is shorter is the upright piece. I believe it is about 1/4 inch shorter, could be a half, depending on the aluminum blend.  That is the only diff. I have had mine side by side to an original Daytona, and the height of the wing was never an issue. On the horizontal piece I add a lengthener. And yes to all that you said. It is rough and you have to do all the work to it. There are no holes. I really do not care if someone want these or not, I am just doing them at a little over cost and to help those who want aluminum wings. I get bugged about it a lot - To make these, because the other options are just not viable as i see it. 

[Daytona Guy]

By the way, no one has ever accused me of having a to short of a wing

[thallium]

They are castings from an original wing. They are just like an original daytona wing. Dimesnsionally, with any casting there is going to be some shrinkage. You can not tell with the naked eye though. Prepwise, just take a grinder and remove some of the burrs etc. Then when you are ready, a slight glaze of bondo over the whole wing to make it smooth. Also you'll have to drill and tap the holes or have a maching shop do it for you. It's really not a big deal. Even a dummy like myself was able to drill and tap my own holes. The shrinkage is very very minimal.   It is super strong and you wont have to worry about flexing or cracking like a fiberglass wing.    That picture above is one of danes wings. They are so strong, my fat butt could sit on it without any problems as you can see.   I'm happy with what I got and if you are looking to do a daytona project, you might consider getting one.   It's not like you can go down to the local hardware store and pick one up any day of the week.

[Daytona Guy]

In a couple of weeks we need to get together and cruise up and down Fourth Plain.

[bull]

In a couple of weeks we need to get together and cruise up and down Fourth Plain.

Yea, and you had better take your buddy bull along or he'll be pretty pissed off!

[bull]

BTW Dane, are you planning on doing the Gresham show again this year? If so do you know when it is? In case you uppity wing guys exclude me from a local cruise just minutes from my house I'd like to at least see the yellow clone in Gresham.

[Daytona Guy]

I'll be there. Lord willing. Aug 13th.

[bull]

I'll be there. Lord willing. Aug 13th.

Good. Lord willing I'll be there too.

Oh and Mike, let me know if you need a wing man for any impromptu Fourth or Mill Plain cruises. Or if you need someone to blow the carbon out of the purple beast. I'll be willing. Also, now that you no longer have an all blue R/T are you going to stick with the name AllBlueRT?

[wetfeetmi]

I have one of these wings! I bought it on e-bay several months ago. I think it was shipped from Chicago area to me in MI. I haven't done any finish work yet, but it looks like a nice piece. Rick

[PocketThunder]

How soon do you need the cash?  I'd like one but the charger fund is down right now while i sell my house.....  I'll be back in action i probably 2 months..  I'd like to build a clone to go with my 500 someday...

[BigBlockSam]

Dane i emailed you , i want one! guys Dane is offering you a great deal on these wings. it's almost excact to the old nascar wings. fiiberglass wings suck they shake over  100 mph, plus with age they sag. thanks for the offer Dane i'm in. 

[Old Moparz]

I got mine in the beginning of the year from Dane & it looks good. (Thanks again, Dane) When I found out he was getting a couple done & offered to add one more, I jumped on it so I wouldn't have to take a stab at the helpgagme offerings or end up making one from scrap wood. Yes, halpag eBayed a few, & when I asked about where they came from, they played dumb. (Not too hard for them either.)

Even the cat couldn't tell it wasn't an original.

[BigBlockSam]

i bought one of those   halpag wings from oscar. nice wing correct hieght and smoothed out too but not drilled for the studs. that was good cause they drill there wings wrong. Rene

[hotrod98]

Dane, The check's in the mail...can't wait.

[Daytona Guy]

I'm sure I will open a can of worms with this.



From my studies and being raised in an engineer family, here are some of my discoveries of the trunk/wing reinforcements of the Daytona.

Adjustable Base
Look at the engineering of the adjustable base. Looks pretty weak, but not if you understand the dynamics involved. It is not designed for down force like most people may think.. If down force was the issue, then that adjustable base is completely inadequate.

Lift to Drag
Among other things, there are two basic laws of physics/aerodynamics involved. Lift = (You have to think upside down when talking about lift, because the wing is an inverted "Clark" wing. Therefore, Lift =   Down Force for a Daytona wing)   Drag is created by friction of mass going through air - plus the more lift that is created the more drag forces are involved.

The wing's base will want to lift in the front the more drag that is generated. The back base of the of the vertical stabilizer will carry most of the down force. Notice that the reinforcement bracing is to the front of the wing. The back quarter was adequate. What this wing reinforcement does at high speeds is fascinating. It neutralized the stress and uses down and up forces to stabilize the wing.   The down force is distributed throughout the whole back of the quarter panel and the trunk by neutralizing the energy created.

If it was all about down force and having 500 pounds bearing down on that little L shaped base adjustment bracket, then someone needed to be fired. Look at the picture. You have a thin trunk and a thin base adjuster. I could stand on that L Shaped base adjuster and bend it and I weigh 175 lbs.

The wing trunk reinforcements are useful at speeds over 150 MPH. Many dealer installed wings where placed on Chargers and the trunk bracing was never used. The Wing washers were. You can use the braces or not. It all depends on what you are going to use your car for.

[wetfeetmi]

Dane, I'm just a dumb hick blue collar here in S.W. MI. However, when I open my trunk lid, I need to see braces! Maybe my car will not know the difference, but it wouldn't look right without them. I might sleep a little better knowing they are there too! Cheap insurance.
I once saw a photo of a couple of nice looking young ladies perched on a Superbird wing, and I have to believe the quarter panels were thankful for braces. Rick

[bull]

I'll talk with my wife tomorrow Dane.   It wouldn't hurt to have an extra.   I'm trying to build an extra parts stash.

I can't have both Dane.   Remember what I asked about was for sale earlier?



Cruise 4th Plain, right on.   Bull took me down it a couple times last time he drove Blue.   2 wing cars cruisin' is sure to cause an accident.


Change my username?   It's mike mopar already at Style.   I've been thinking about it.     I'm thinking about having Bill paint the wingcar as well.   How about AllBlackClone?

Black? You must have more energy than I do. You'll need a telescopic handle for the dust mop to get the top of the wing. How about "IownaDayclona" for a username?

[thallium]

That picture is with at least 180+ lbs without any braces. It can take a lot more without any problems. Believe me, that picture is proof that it can take the weight without braces.    I can even grab the wing and shake the whole car.

[BigBlockSam]

when I open my trunk lid, I need to see braces!

[bull]

Guys, I think Dane knows what he's talking about. He's only done 9 or 10 Daytona clones.

[hotrod98]

We're talking cosmetics, bull...not structural integrity.
Any one have the dimensions for building the braces? They look simple enough to me, just hard to tell what size material to use from the pics. If someone were to give me the exact dimensions,including material thickness, I might build a few sets for cost of materials + shipping. I have a welding table to build jigs on and a chop saw for cutting...I can tig or mig them. Sometimes I just love to have an excuse to weld. I'm not interested in making any $, but could help out a few people on the board. I wish that I could find an original set to borrow, I could duplicate them identically then.

[Daytona Guy]

Do not get me wrong. I am going to put braces in my trunk next year for cosmetics. I just do not want anyone to feel that they have to have them if they cannot afford them. I just think it is fascinating how they designed the braces.

One more note - I feel I am missing someone. If you want a wing and have contacted me, send me another email for insurance - I do not do this very well and I'm flying by the seat of my pants. Just do not want to leave someone out. I am taking the wing in in the morning.

[Charger_Fan]

Geez, this is soooo tempting. If I had the extra fundage, I'd be all over it.


In 6 years, I'll be more prepared.

[BigBlockSam]

6 yrs, thats a long time

[hotrod98]

I think Dane was taking his wing to the foundry today. Not sure when the cutoff is for ordering.

I went over to my buddy's shop and fired my charger up last night and drove it a little. It's looking awfully sad in primer and those primered up slotted wheels. Man those have got to go and soon. As soon as the wing arrives, I'm going to take my bee over and store it and bring the Charger back to the shop at the house. Too many projects to finish now, shouldn't even be thinking about this car right now. 

This car is much nicer than the pictures show. With the multicolor primer and no bumpers it looks like a beater.

[Charger_Fan]

6 yrs, thats a long time

I know, but I really can't afford it right now. I'd have to float a mortgage payment to do it & I hate doing that...I'm trying to be good here.


Hey Hotrod, if you don't want those slotted wheels, you should list them in the classifieds here...members here are looking for those.

[hemigeno]

I disagree with the conclusion that the wing did not produce significant downforce.   It did.   The theory that drag from the wing would completely offset the downforce created does not quantify the amounts of each respective force applied.   I'm sure that the wing uprights did have some lessening impact on the downforce via drag, but that would have been far outweighed by the upside-down airfoil downforce effect.

Incidentally, the NASCAR wing braces were far more substantial than the street versions.   I believe there was a pic on www.aerowarriors.com at one time that showed the racing version.   Chrysler was worried that Bill France & Co. wouldn't let them use braces on the track if they weren't also in the street cars.   Similar deal with the fender scoops and holes, front chin spoiler, A-pillar covers, etc. etc.  

You guys are right, the quarterpanels can carry a fairly substantial load, without the braces.   The wings are mounted near the outer edge of the panel itself, and the rear mounting point of the wing upright is close to the tail panel which would have greatly added to its inherent ridgidity.   Wing washers help to spread the load over a larger area as well.   By pointing out that the wings can be installed (and sat on) without the need for bracing helps to prove the point that no need for a massive support existed.  

I have heard numbers about the amount of downforce created by the wing ranging from 500# to 700#.   Over two uprights, that is a very manageable amount of weight to handle, even with the bracing method employed.  

If someone can calculate the amount of downforce generated by the horizontal stabilizer, and compare that to the amount of drag imposed by the vertical uprights and show that the latter number is greater than the first number, then the situation might be viewed differently.   I seriously doubt that the engineers back in 1968-69 forgot to consider this fact.

The Superbird uprights were raked back even farther than the Daytona's.   Both wings may have created a "lever" situation where the front of the horizontal stabilizer was held in place (through tension) by the bracing, but the back edge of the horizontal stabilizer took the downforce from the wing and applied it not only to the back part of the bracing, but to the whole back corner of the quarterpanel.   If the downforce applied exceeded the drag/tension, then the net effect is to push the back end of the car down.

Either way, it worked.   No Daytona or Superbird ever rolled over in a race that I know of, including ARCA.   They spun out because there are still limits of traction, but the drivers from the day all remarked how stable the wing cars were in high-speed cornering.

Interesting discussion though.

I'm not actually an engineer, but I play one on TV.   Or was it that I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night.   Or was it...   Aww, nevermind...

[hotrod98]

Very interesting information.
Many years ago, I always had wings on my dragsters. I read several articles by areonautical engineers that stated that wings don't actually start to work as designed until you reach around 150 to 200 mph and at any slower speeds they actually cause parasitic drag. Since my super comp dragster generally ran slightly slower at around 145 mph, I quit paying for the extra cost of the wing setup. The car actually went a little faster , but I did have problems on two seperate occasions where the car seemed to lose traction and would start moving around in the lights. I almost ended up rolling the car over after it started bouncing on the slicks.   
As for the Daytona wing, whether they work or not is not important to me, they're downright awesome looking. The wing is the driving force behind wanting to build the car to begin with.  My wife wants a wing car now. Great...I can't even get my other projects finished.

[Old Moparz]

The appearance of the wing is what first hooked me as well. I can't recall any other cars, except for a few exotic hand builts, that leave such a dramatic impression when you see it. I do recall reading that it was speeds of 70 mph & above, where it improved handling. Wasn't the huge down force also the reason for the front fender scoops? They needed tire clearance on the NASCAR versions because they rubbed the top underside. (That's what I had read somewhere.)

If they made them today, they'd probably make them out of carbon fiber & shove a DOT brake light in it.

[hotrod98]

Maybe 170 mph.
Remember these cars ran at 200 mph.
70 mph would be rather slow for anything to work aerodynamically I would think.
I know that at 70 mph, wind will pick parts up and send them flying around, but they're not connected to a 3000+ lb car.

[Daytona Guy]

<<<I disagree with the conclusion that the wing did not produce significant downforce.  It did.  The theory that drag from the wing would completely offset the downforce created does not quantify the amounts of each respective force applied.  I'm sure that the wing uprights did have some lessening impact on the downforce via drag, but that would have been far outweighed by the upside-down airfoil downforce effect.>>>

Totally agree. Just a misunderstanding. My focus was on the adjustable L bracket. Like I said ----" The down force (500 + lbs) is distributed throughout the whole back of the quarter panel and the trunk by neutralizing the energy created." The point was that the reinforcements do not necessarily bear the load, they true up the whole quarter. If all the adjustable L bracket did was bear the load that adjustable L bracket is a joke, but that was not the purpose of it. The weakness of that bracket proves my point. I mean, does it really make sense to transfer 500 lbs from one thin sheet metal to another, by putting all the theoretical load to one point on the flimsy un-reinforced thin sheet metal of the
trunk?

[hemigeno]

I agree that the bracket setup they have is not adequate to transfer any kind of major load to the frame.   However, there are two things to keep in mind.   First, the brackets in the street cars are a light-weight version of what they put in the racecars.   They put something that resembled the real (racecar) brackets in the street cars so NASCAR couldn't use that as an excuse to outlaw the wing.   IIRC, they may have added some reinforcements to the trunk floor on race-versions too.  Second, the total downforce load is spread over two brackets, halving the effective load they must bear.   When you look at it like that, the system is probably adequate, but is certainly not over-built.

Remember this parable to understand how an engineer thinks:

To an optimist, the glass is half full

To a pessimist, the glass is half empty

To an engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be...

[Daytona Guy]

<<<To an optimist, the glass is half full

To a pessimist, the glass is half empty

To an engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be...>>>

I love it. Actually the NASCAR's did not do anything to the trunk that I can see other than make the trunk even weaker by cutting away more metal. I will post a pic later that show it. The L bracket don't fasten to the frame, but to just the sheet metal of the trunk. Keep in mind that the drag on the wing would pull the front base of the wing up away from the quarters. The bracing holds the wing down in the front, as well as help to distribute the load that the back of the base bears.

[Daytona R/T SE]

I think Dane was taking his wing to the foundry today. Not sure when the cutoff is for ordering.

I went over to my buddy's shop and fired my charger up last night and drove it a little. It's looking awfully sad in primer and those primered up slotted wheels. Man those have got to go and soon. As soon as the wing arrives, I'm going to take my bee over and store it and bring the Charger back to the shop at the house. Too many projects to finish now, shouldn't even be thinking about this car right now.  

This car is much nicer than the pictures show. With the multicolor primer and no bumpers it looks like a beater.

So, Hotrod-what are yoyu going to do with the slotted wheels when you take them off your car-they'd look really cool on my '68    What size are they?

[hotrod98]

Hadn't really thought about it. I'll probably leave them on to roll the car around until it's finished, sometime late next year. I don't buy wheels and tires until the car is completely finished. I've had a couple of guys that worked for me that would run out and buy their rims and tires before they even started on their body work. By the time they were finshed (if they finished) they would either have changed their minds, gotten crap all over the rims and tires or they're out of style. In this case, I'm pretty set on 15" magnum 500's with the magnum 500 spinners. Undecided on tires. I have another set of those slotted wheels that belong on my 63 Belvedere. The fronts and backs are slightly different styles though. What I need to do is find someone to buy the 63 hardtop. I'm never going to get around to it. I have a 4 door 63 belvedere to go with it. Some very nice parts between the two. I also have a 65 model 413 motor out of a big car and an early 4 speed. I would sell all of it for $1500 just to get it out of my back yard. A guy could build a pretty awesome car with this stuff.
I need to list my 71 Scamp at the same time. It's a 318 car and pretty solid with a little rust in the lower quarters and no where else. Runs and drives, but reverse is out.

[Daytona Guy]

A beautiful wheel - WOW

[Daytona Guy]

Here is the pics I promised. I know that these are the braces that nascar used. I wander if any of the race cars used the stock bracing? They were engineered for high speeds. I think, just my guess, that by the looks of the stock bracing nobody trusted them. I can understand that. Both are good designs. This pic shows that even the stock cars, by looking at this bracing, did not have the best engineering when it came to trunk reinforcements. They just went from the quarter panel skin to this trunk floor. Look how mush of the supports that we have under our cars have been removed.

[Daytona Guy]

<< Wasn't the huge down force also the reason for the front fender scoops? They needed tire clearance on the NASCAR versions because they rubbed the top underside. (That's what I had read somewhere.>>>

They have a whole article on this on the aero warriors web page. I believe it has the most realistic answer for the fender scoops. If you see the tires on the race cars they do not appear to be rubbing the top of the fenders. The tires do not line up with the holes if the tire would come up. Plus that little round holes would be the wrong shape, for a tires surface is relatively square when it makes contact. I believe, as this article states, that the shape of the scoops drew air out of the fender well, that relieved some of the turbulence that is created by the tires chewing up the air. The theory also believed it would help keep the brakes cooler. If you saw one of these stock car Daytona's I do not think that the tires clearance argument has much credibility. Just my opinion. They cannot find any definitive thought on this from the engineers who designed the Daytona, at least that is what the aero warriors article states. Cool stuff.

[BigBlockSam]

I do not think that the tires clearance argument has much credibility   

[hotrod98]

The nascar bracing has a lot cleaner look than the stock setup, and much simpler. I wonder why they made such a complicated brace for the street version?

[Old Moparz]

<< Wasn't the huge down force also the reason for the front fender scoops? They needed tire clearance on the NASCAR versions because they rubbed the top underside. (That's what I had read somewhere.>>>

They have a whole article on this on the aero warriors web page. I believe it has the most realistic answer for the fender scoops. If you see the tires on the race cars they do not appear to be rubbing the top of the fenders. The tires do not line up with the holes if the tire would come up. Plus that little round holes would be the wrong shape, for a tires surface is relatively square when it makes contact. I believe, as this article states, that the shape of the scoops drew air out of the fender well, that relieved some of the turbulence that is created by the tires chewing up the air. The theory also believed it would help keep the brakes cooler. If you saw one of these stock car Daytona's I do not think that the tires clearance argument has much credibility. Just my opinion. They cannot find any definitive thought on this from the engineers who designed the Daytona, at least that is what the aero warriors article states. Cool stuff.

That makes more sense (brakes & turbulence) than what I had read years ago, but it's been so many years I don't recall where I read it. It was long before internet info & web pages.

[hemigeno]

<< Wasn't the huge down force also the reason for the front fender scoops? They needed tire clearance on the NASCAR versions because they rubbed the top underside. (That's what I had read somewhere.>>>

They have a whole article on this on the aero warriors web page. I believe it has the most realistic answer for the fender scoops. If you see the tires on the race cars they do not appear to be rubbing the top of the fenders. The tires do not line up with the holes if the tire would come up. Plus that little round holes would be the wrong shape, for a tires surface is relatively square when it makes contact. I believe, as this article states, that the shape of the scoops drew air out of the fender well, that relieved some of the turbulence that is created by the tires chewing up the air. The theory also believed it would help keep the brakes cooler. If you saw one of these stock car Daytona's I do not think that the tires clearance argument has much credibility. Just my opinion. They cannot find any definitive thought on this from the engineers who designed the Daytona, at least that is what the aero warriors article states. Cool stuff.

Absolutely right, Absolutely right...

I find the tire clearance explanation somewhat humorous.  There's no way that's what they were added for, just like you stated.  If they needed tire clearance, why didn't they just change the shape of the fender or add fiberglass bump, instead of a reverse scoop?  They just didn't want to tell the real reason IMHO.

Also - I remember seeing that picture (or one like it) of Petty's Superbird wing bracing.  That's still not the bracing arrangement I was thinking of.  Each race team probably came up with their own way to brace the wing.  I can probably ask Cotton Owens about what he did sometime soon.  He pulled the #6 Daytona out of the Darlington Raceway Museum, and started it up for the first time in 35 years just 2 weeks ago (I passed up my opportunity to be there for the startup    ).  He might be able to send me a pic of the bracing they used.

[G-Series]

Hi all.  Some of the literature in Greg Kwaitkowski's collection indicates that the real reason for the scoops was to reduce drag.  They accomplished this by reducing the pressure in the engine bay. Think about how a race car is set up, not with inner fenders like our street cars.  If I remember right, they reduce overall drag by either 3 or 5%.

[Charger_Fan]

They just didn't want to tell the real reason IMHO.

That's kinda what I was thinking. The clearance story may have just bled down from the answers given to reporters during the racing days, to help keep the competition from using their ideas.

That #6 Daytona story is pretty cool, what are they going to be doing with it? Are they going to be driving it a bit now?

[hemigeno]

They just didn't want to tell the real reason IMHO.

That's kinda what I was thinking. The clearance story may have just bled down from the answers given to reporters during the racing days, to help keep the competition from using their ideas.

That #6 Daytona story is pretty cool, what are they going to be doing with it? Are they going to be driving it a bit now?

Cotton last year just finished a replica of the '64 Dodge he owned (and I believe he drove it a little bit too back in the day), and he takes it around to do parade laps at races, etc.  I wish he would put that Daytona out on the track to do some REAL laps, but I can understand why they wouldn't do that.  Some other guys might know more, but I'm only aware of a few original Daytona racecars still left... Cotton's #6, the #71 Isaac, and the #88 in the Talladega Museum that isn't the real #88 car...  There are a few chassis still around (Greg Kwiatkowski's original #88 comes to mind), but I don't think those have much (if any) of their sheet metal left.  Irreplaceable pieces of history...

Here's a quick story Cotton told me last year:  Buddy Baker had nearly a one-lap lead on the field at a race in 1970.  He comes in for fuel/tires very late in the race, and Cotton tells him to take it easy, and bring home a winner.  Buddy hammers the throttle coming out of the pits, and knocks the nose off the car by running into the back of an also-ran.  Cotton was so mad, he said he took a torch and saw to that car and cut it up into pieces...

I'm with you on their lame excuses for the scoops - they had to be trying to throw the competition (pretty much just Ford back then) off the trail.

G-Series (Gary), I remember that same % reduction in drag from somewhere too.  Way too many tidbits of information floating around between my ears to remember exactly where I read that, or exactly why it was, but that rings a bell w/ me.

[hemigeno]

I dug through my piles of paperwork and found a 40 page thesis written by R.P. Marcell & G.F. Romberg, entitled "The Aerodynamic Development of the Charger Daytona for Stock Car Competition".  I had read through this a while back, and there is a whole lot of engineering jargon to wade through.

Some of the more interesting tidbits from that document are:

The Vertical Stabilizers were just as much a part of the handling package as the Horizontal Stabilizer.

At a given yaw angle, the aerodynamic side force acting on the Daytona is higher than on the 1969 race car (Charger 500).  The higher side force, opposing the inertia forces, reduces the "pushing" tendencies.  Of course, the largest influence on aerodynamic directional stability is due to the vertical stabilizers.

The Vertical Stabilizers were intended to be aerodynamic by themselves. 

"These aerodynamic surfaces are 1.71 sq. Ft. each in area and have a geometric aspect ratio of 2.34.  The cross-sectional shape is an NACA 0012 symmetrical airfoil section."

The undesirable forces from the wing and stabilizer were far outweighed by the desirable rear downforce and added stability in corners.
(sorry I can't replicate the symbols in the following passage correctly)

Effects of Rear Deck Stabilizers - Figure 11 shows the minor axial force penalty resulting from the rear deck stabilizers.  At a horizontal stabilizer angle ("lambda" subscript "G") of -10 degrees, the axial force is increased by 7% at zero yaw angle.  Figure 11 also presents the front axle and rear axle lift coefficients as a function of yaw angle.  These data indicate the wide range of rear axle lift coefficients available with the horizontal stabilizer (approximately .14 for a 10 degree change in "lambda" subscript "G").  Note that as the Horizontal stabilizer angle is increased negatively, the front axle lift increases slightly.  This, of course, is due to the horizontal stabilizer being positioned behind the rear wheels.  A more optimum position for the horizontal stabilizer would be directly over the rear wheels.
     However, the vertical stabilizer effectiveness demands a very rearward location.  Coupling the vertical stabilizer requirements with the practical aspects of mounting the horizontal stabilizer resulted in the compromise that is on the car today.
     Also shown in Figure 11, for comparative purposes, are the aerodynamic characteristics of a 1" high, 45degree rear deck lip spoiler.  The comparison indicates that the horizontal stabilizer is a much more effective and efficient aerodynamic system than the rear deck lip spoiler.  Lift to axial force ratio is a time-honored method of measuring aerodynamic efficiency.  The lift to axial force ratio of the rear deck lip spoiler is 7 while the ratio is 19 for the horizontal stabilizer.

I found it interesting that by having the rear wing so far back on the car, they actually created lift on the front end since the rear wing was pushing down on the back end of the car, well beyond the centerline of the rear axle.  They needed the wing on the back to take full advantage of the horizontal stabilizer effect though, so it made the most sense to keep it where it was.

DaytonaGuy, if you want, I'll be happy to run off a copy of this Thesis and send it to you.  If a few other guys want a copy, I could probably do the same.  It's too long to scan and post though.

Geno

[Daytona Guy]

<<<DaytonaGuy, if you want, I'll be happy to run off a copy of this Thesis and send it to you.  If a few other guys want a copy, I could probably do the same.  It's too long to scan and post though.>>>


Sounds good. I have some of this in my book from Frank Moriarty called "Suppercars". More is good. Tell me what it cost - I will pay you for it.

This is just good stuff. Thanks man.

[hemigeno]

Sounds good. I have some of this in my book from Frank Moriarty called "Suppercars". More is good. Tell me what it cost - I will pay you for it.

This is just good stuff. Thanks man.

No problem, no cost either.  I have a copy machine here at the office.  I won't be able to send it out until next week after the 'Nats, though.

PM or email me with your mailing address and I'll take care of it.

[Daytona Guy]

Awesome man! I will.

[wingcars6970]

Regarding hackett brass in Michigan who made wings for the daytona back in the day .I was the one who discovered this company and its link.And provided it to Sue George president of winged warriors .She recieved and printed in the newsletter story was called maker of the wings .The guys name was Mr Fine that sent Sue the letter.I have copys of Sue and Ed Georges correspondances and the story from the newsletters

[Old Moparz]

Regarding hackett brass in Michigan who made wings for the daytona back in the day .I was the one who discovered this company and its link.And provided it to Sue George president of winged warriors .She recieved and printed in the newsletter story was called maker of the wings .The guys name was Mr Fine that sent Sue the letter.I have copys of Sue and Ed Georges correspondances and the story from the newsletters

Dave,

I remember that when you sent me the info & link last year on Moparts. I had posted that link on the old Dodge - Charger.com before it died so others could check with Hackett about casting some. The person I spoke with said they could, but would need an original wing to mold from to do it. I don't have any wings in stock, but fortunately, Daytona Guy did. 

[wingcars6970]

I found the newsletter

[jodaddy1]

Hey is this a done deal???   How soon do you need the funds to buy one???  I'd like to get one but need till Nov. for the funds to be right.  maybe end of Oct.  Let me know email if possible!!!!
Joe

[Daytona Guy]

It is all a done deal. The only one I will have left - is mine. I might let it go, but I will have to think about it. The only reason I am doing all of this is because I was making me one before the prices go up. Keep in touch.

[jodaddy1]

gladly---funds are better than I thought they would be and I should have enough by the middle of Sept.  If you caught the pics of my car you see I need a GOOD wing.  The nose will be a steel one fabed here.  The wing I'm not gona try.  I have a friend with an NOS nose so he's leting me get measurements and fab beside his so I can get it right.

[hemigeno]

I had a chance this weekend to talk with Charlie Glotzbach about Daytonas.   In 1969-70 he was the driver of the NASCAR Grand National #99 Daytona prepared by Nichels Engineering (Sponsored by Dow Chemical).   Charlie also did a LOT of aero car testing for Chrysler during the development of the Daytona - which leads to the part of the conversation I though you guys would find interesting...

Charlie said that the first versions of the Daytona did not have the wing braces in the trunk.   He said that when they did laps around the Chrysler Proving Grounds the downforce from the wing buckled the quarter panel.   They were going well in excess of 200 mph when that happened (CPG is a humongous 5 mile oval track), but it happened nonetheless.  

I specifically asked Charlie if it was the wing's downforce that buckled the quarter, or whether it was the uprights being pulled/twisted off the car.   He said it was most definitely the downforce.   He said it squished the quarter out on the sides.   Of course, he went on to explain about the trunk braces, etc.

Charlie also stated that the Daytona was "hands-down" the best racecar body he drove during his time on oval tracks.   He said it was extremely stable, especially in the banked corners.   Charlie mentioned that the front end of the Daytona produced enough downforce that he snapped more than one lower control arm.   He also had a wheel break on him too - which he attributed to the front end downforce.   While all that downforce didn't necessarily help straightaway speeds, it helped them stick like glue in the corners.

If you ever get the chance to talk with some of these "seasoned" racers, they are an absolute wealth of information.   Some wild tales of life back then on the racing circuit too...     

[dayclona]

I had a chance this weekend to talk with Charlie Glotzbach about Daytonas.   In 1969-70 he was the driver of the NASCAR Grand National #99 Daytona prepared by Nichels Engineering (Sponsored by Dow Chemical).   Charlie also did a LOT of aero car testing for Chrysler during the development of the Daytona - which leads to the part of the conversation I though you guys would find interesting...

Charlie said that the first versions of the Daytona did not have the wing braces in the trunk.   He said that when they did laps around the Chrysler Proving Grounds the downforce from the wing buckled the quarter panel.   They were going well in excess of 200 mph when that happened (CPG is a humongous 5 mile oval track), but it happened nonetheless.  

I specifically asked Charlie if it was the wing's downforce that buckled the quarter, or whether it was the uprights being pulled/twisted off the car.   He said it was most definitely the downforce.   He said it squished the quarter out on the sides.   Of course, he went on to explain about the trunk braces, etc.

Charlie also stated that the Daytona was "hands-down" the best racecar body he drove during his time on oval tracks.   He said it was extremely stable, especially in the banked corners.   Charlie mentioned that the front end of the Daytona produced enough downforce that he snapped more than one lower control arm.   He also had a wheel break on him too - which he attributed to the front end downforce.   While all that downforce didn't necessarily help straightaway speeds, it helped them stick like glue in the corners.

If you ever get the chance to talk with some of these "seasoned" racers, they are an absolute wealth of information.   Some wild tales of life back then on the racing circuit too...     

Hey Hemigeno nice post! thanks.......One question the test car wing? do you know if it was the 22" "stock" wing or the 13" "squid tube" design? it would be interesting to know!............................................On the same note, I 'll recall a conversation I had with Richard and his brother Maurice Petty about two years ago when I visited them at their home/shop ..................regarding the early wingcar race days, they said the wingcars downforce was tremendous! to the point of broken suspension parts, to blown tires, cracked rims, Maurice Petty was Richards pit crew chief/mechanic, Maurice told me the bird was tough to turn in corners because the wing uprights (verticals) forced the car to stay sraight, plus combined with the downforce ate up tires, suspension parts, brakes, etc! their solution to this problem was to remove the center section of the wing and flip it over! so now the wing "raised" the rear of the car at speed, so when aproaching a turn Richard could trottle thru the turn, letting the down force on the nose  steer the car thru while the rear lifted and help the car want to turn! quote, un quote!
                      Richard and Maurice said eventually the other teams noticed what they had done! and the other wingcar (daytona & superbird) teams followed  their lead, this took the slight edge off that they enjoyied for a few races!


                                                                 Mike/ DAYCLONA ENTERPRISES

[A383Wing]

On a side note about the wings....I don't need one. I have one of the race car wings on our Daytona. I found it up here in a little city in the mountains for $200 in '97. He said it was a birthday gift from his brother in the souith. The race wings had 8 set screws in the horizontal part at the ends. And instead of 4 studs going through the rear quarter panels to the braces, mine only has 3...they removed one of the stud supports to install the cable required by Nascar that went up one side support, through the top wing, and down the other side. This was mandatory in case the car got into a wreck so the wing pieces would not break off and possibly go into the crowd. Mine still has the cable inside...
I suppose I probably should have taken pictures of all the layers of paint on it when I was refinishing it....then I could have maybe determined which car it was from....oh well......

Just my 2 cents worth....

Bryan 

[hemigeno]

Hey Hemigeno nice post! thanks.......One question the test car wing? do you know if it was the 22" "stock" wing or the 13" "squid tube" design? it would be interesting to know!

It was the "stock" wing he was referring to.   Did the 13" wing hit the testing track, or was it just a design/model variant?   Charlie mentioned them playing around a lot with the angles of the wing, with the front chin spoiler, and a whole lot of suspension changes/adjustments.

On the same note, I 'll recall a conversation I had with Richard and his brother Maurice Petty about two years ago when I visited them at their home/shop ..................regarding the early wingcar race days, they said the wingcars downforce was tremendous! to the point of broken suspension parts, to blown tires, cracked rims,

Yep, same thing that Charlie said - exactly...   LOADS of downforce.   Perhaps in their effort to create downforce, the natural loading that occurs when a car goes into a corner was overlooked?

Maurice Petty was Richards pit crew chief/mechanic, Maurice told me the bird was tough to turn in corners because the wing uprights (verticals) forced the car to stay sraight, plus combined with the downforce ate up tires, suspension parts, brakes, etc! their solution to this problem was to remove the center section of the wing and flip it over! so now the wing "raised" the rear of the car at speed, so when aproaching a turn Richard could trottle thru the turn, letting the down force on the nose   steer the car thru while the rear lifted and help the car want to turn! quote, un quote!
                                Richard and Maurice said eventually the other teams noticed what they had done! and the other wingcar (daytona & superbird) teams followed   their lead, this took the slight edge off that they enjoyied for a few races!


                                                                                                 Mike/ DAYCLONA ENTERPRISES

Charlie didn't mention anything about anyone flipping the wing over, but he had little to do with turning wrenches on the cars.   Charlie said that he occasionally helped out if they were changing a motor out in the car, but he pretty well left the actual car setup, etc. to the team mechanics.   He gave them a lot of feedback as to how the car was performing, which is one of the reasons Ronnie Householder & George Wallace used Charlie a lot to do the prototype testing - he was good at telling them how the car was handling on the track.

As far as not being able to turn the cars, Charlie said the only track they really had a problem with too much traction was Talladega.   He said the speeds were so high there (therefore more downforce at higher speeds), and the track surface was very rough (especially a big series of bumps going into Turn #1).   With so much grip on the track due to the surface and higher banking, they did break more suspension and wheels there than any other place.   The tire wear situation was incredibly bad too.   Charlie said they would put a set of Goodyear tires on, and they would start losing chunks of rubber after about 4-5 laps.   Firestones were even worse, starting to lose chunks after 3-4 laps.   He said you could feel it when the tires started to go, so you just pulled in for new tires.   Some attributed this to the higher speeds of the Daytona & 426 Hemi, but there's a pretty good chance it was just too much downforce.   Big Bill (France) told the Chrysler guys to just go slower in the race to keep from blowing tires...   Yeah right...     

Charlie said that Daytona Speedway and other racetracks weren't nearly as bad for suspension problems.   I actually have a picture hanging on the wall in my office of Dick Brook's Superbird spinning out in the middle of Turn 1 at Daytona, so they definitely could get loose in the corners.

All 4 of the pictures of Petty's and/or Hamilton's Superbirds from 1970 do not appear as if the wing is upside down though - it looks pretty dang flat on top, or slightly curved on bottom, depending on the picture.   If they flipped it over, that curved part on top wouldn't mate up with the wing upright - it should stick out like a sore thumb to even the most casual of observers.   3 of my pictures were from Daytona (2nd race of the '70 season), but one of Hamilton's car is from Michigan (Yankee 400) - the 34th race of the '70 season.   That's not to say they didn't ever do it.

Personally, I would find it hard to believe it was a tremendous advantage to have a bunch of lift on the back end of a car.   The '66-7 NASCAR Dodge Chargers had a small lip/spoiler added on the back end.   That was an attempt (sorry as it was) to put some downforce on the back to keep the tires from spinning when you hit even a small bump.   If Richard & Maurice's guys put the wing on upside down, they almost certainly had to adjust it so that it generated little, if any, lift - maybe a reduction of downforce, but lift??     I know it's not really possible to compare those racecars to today's racecars, but the oval track cars of today are EXTREMELY sensitive to front/rear balance.   Having all front downforce, and actually having lift in the back seems like a bad (VERY LOOSE) combination, and I'm only an armchair crew chief.

Knowing how innovative the Petty's were, it wouldn't surprise me if they figured out something that Chrysler's engineers hadn't considered, whatever it was.   That must have been pretty cool to go to their shop, and meeting Maurice.     One of these days I intend to make it out to Randleman for the big soiree they have for the Pettys every year.   Super nice people, from what I've heard.

[Ghoste]

"The '66-7 NASCAR Dodge Chargers had a small lip/spoiler added on the back end.  That was an attempt (sorry as it was) to put some downforce on the back to keep the tires from spinning when you hit even a small bump."


Yeah, you look at the profile of the first gen and the fastback is shaped exactly like an airfoil.  Not a happy mistake to have made.

[Daytona Guy]

Callled foundry - they have finished all of the wings (horizontal part)   - Now they are starting on the uprights. My hope is to have them shipped by the end of this week, if not the first of next.

[hotrod98]

Sounds good.
Looks like the guys that ordered wings and braces will get them about the same time.

[BigBlockSam]

i luv it when a plan comes together 

[BigBlockSam]

if anybody is making a supebird wing i'm in. Rene

[hotrod98]

As for a superbird wing, count me in too. I made an offer on the fiberglass sb wing set on ebay but the guy said no. It looks like he pulled it before it ended. I really would like to have an aluminum set, but Dane says that due to the larger size of the sb wing that a solid core aluminum set might weigh around 100 lbs. It would take two guys to lift it into place. lol  Kind of like my 69 Camaro funny car body. It took two guys to lift it so that I could get out. I started climbing out throught the roof hatch. Man, those old funny car bodies were heavy. I don't miss that car at all.  Oops...I'm rambling.
I wonder if a machine shop could bore out a couple of large holes through the bottom of the uprights and across the core of the horizontal. Some of those machine shops can do amazing things.
Would be nice if we could find a small foundry that had the ability to build the correct type of hollow core moulds at a reasonable price. Probably won't happen though.
Oh yeah, most of the wing braces went out yesterday by UPS ground. I ran out of boxes so a couple of sets will go out Monday.
Rene, your's went out in yesterday's batch.
Dane's 2 sets and Joe's set will go out Monday.