debushau Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 I am trying to fit the front cycle wings on my seven and I am positive that I have 2 right wings. Another person I spoke to believes that the wings are identical. Maybe I have a badly moulded model but it seems to me that one outside surface is flatter than the other and to mount the repeaters so that they sit identically on both sides, you need to ensure that same edge (whether it be the flatter or rounder) is on the outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbhall777 Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 There is no left and right. The radius is not the same on either side of a wing. This is because they are not very accurately made. i.e.symetrical. Such is life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Perry Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 I thought the same when I got mine, then realised that it would be pointless making a different wing for each side. Yes thay appear to be made slightly inacurately, and hence the confusion to those of us who are pedants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blatman Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Lots of folk are fitting the repeaters in the side of the body when cycle wings are used. It is my preference, and leaves wiring considerably less exposed........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Blatman, What sort of cars are they???? I can absolutely confirm that front wings are not handed, but the moulds are hand made and are by now likley great great grandchildren of the original patterns. Remember the fromnt cycle wing can be fitted two ways round so one might be better. Also consider the side repeater set up on the Fireblade car (the ourple one). This has he repeaters in the sides of the headlamps. A nice touch, especially if the headlamps are James Whitings 5 1/4 inch ones. The side repeaters in this instance are not fitted to the lamps as supplied. Arnie Webb So fat the chassis snapped....wink.gif See Fat Arnies 2 piece Seven here See the Le Mans Trip Website here See the Lotus Seven Club North Kent Website here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blatman Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Plastic ones................. I'd forgotten about the 'blade car with repeaters in the headlights. I might consider this during my winter re-build of the "hillclimb" carsmile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHRIS CLARK Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Stay with the 'proper' wings! These, as you know, are made correctly and you have no problem figuring out which one goes on what side!!!!!!!wink.gif Flared Wing Appreciation Society founder member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metal mickey Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Sorry to hijack your thread, but does anyone know how much drag/lift and hence loss of speed flared wings cause? I have flared wings on my car and i'm concidering the swap to cycle's is it worth it? Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 6, 2001 Share Posted July 6, 2001 Drag Co-ef used to be recorded as .60 with cycle wings, .68 with flared Having the roof on also makes a big decrease in drag. I'm not sure if the figures above were roof on or off. The position of the cycle wings, and gap between them and the tyre along the entire length also makes a big difference. Arnie Webb So fat the chassis snapped....wink.gif See Fat Arnies 2 piece Seven here See the Le Mans Trip Website here See the Lotus Seven Club North Kent Website here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debushau Posted July 6, 2001 Author Share Posted July 6, 2001 Thanks for the replies. I initially thought they were identical too and spent many minutes squinting and touching the corners to to confirm this suspicion. After finding a difference in the curvature (after drilling!) I was most disappointed and thought I had made an error. However, the curvature is no better whichever way I face the wing. I suppose I will have to live with slightly crooked repeaters - to match my slightly crooked rear wings! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted July 7, 2001 Share Posted July 7, 2001 Some more hijacking of this thread I am afraid: 1) the 13/14 wheels cycle wings are shorter than the 15/16 ones. Therefore I suspect that the 13/14 must cause more "sand blasting" of the rear wing than the 14/15 ones. Has anyone tried to modify the 13/14 to avoid this problem? 2) Arnie writes that the drag is dependent upon the respective positions of the tyre and wing. I figure that the closer the best.What is the best combination Wheel- Wing to get this configuration? 3)Does the 14 wheel fill better the wing arch than the 13 wheel since they use the same wing? I find the 13 wheel to look a little bit skinny in the 13/14 wings. Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Barkley Posted July 7, 2001 Share Posted July 7, 2001 More hi-jacking of the thread... Does anyone know if it is possible to have proper flared wings on an Academy car? I know that the trend is for cycle wings in racing but prefer the traditional look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blatman Posted July 8, 2001 Share Posted July 8, 2001 Pierre said Arnie writes that the drag is dependent upon the respective positions of the tyre and wing. I figure that the closer the best.What is the best combination Wheel- Wing to get this configuration? Whilst I'm not Adrian Newey, I'm led to beleive that it doesn't make much difference. Think of the wheel as a giant fan, moving a shed load of air in the wrong direction. If the wing is closer, the same volume of air will be at higher pressure. That's why Le Mans cars louvre their wings. It's to vent the pressurised air, not for cooling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Perry Posted July 9, 2001 Share Posted July 9, 2001 You can get them to run very close if you make your own brackets. I measured mine when I made them and the mudguard is 12 mm from the tyre, and the bracket about 6mm. No noticable improvement in top speed though, still about 120mph. I suspect that there may be a little less lift though at those volocities. One thing I would warn anyone contemplating making their own close running mudguards , and that is to make sure you can remove the wheel without having to remove the brackets as well. My first version had this problem but now I am on the mk111 version, all is well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted July 9, 2001 Share Posted July 9, 2001 Thanks Blatman and Graham. Graham, did you modify a Caterham bracket, or did you do it yourself from scratch? If so, which spec. of metal did you use? Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Perry Posted July 9, 2001 Share Posted July 9, 2001 Pierre, I made my own out of aluminium, and they are repositionable for both 13 and 15 inch wheels. They were a nightmare to make and it wasn't until the third version that I got them right. I wouldn't recommend aluminium though as it flexes a lot and you need additional bracing, thin wall steel tube may be easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 Thanks Graham. Aluminium was certainly attractive, but I will draw from your experience and try thin wall iron tube. cheers, Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now