RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

Trans-Am Racing....now that would be fun to watch...as long as they keep the cars "somewhat stock" (like the series was in the 60's and 70's), unlike NASCAR's cookie cutter bodies.....(Thank God for decals)

RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

That car only looks like they put a Challenger nose on the front of the "everycar". The Challenger inset grill and headlights would be a aerodynamic nightmare for a NASCAR series. That was the whole reason Ford made the special Talledega Torinos and why there were the pointed nosed and big winged SuperBees in the late 60s early 70s before NASCAR outlawed them. Even the 05 to 09 Mustang front end is a brick compared to the cars run in NASCAR.

But yeah, I sure would love to see new Mustangs, Camaros and Challengers (not necessarily in that order) running together on some road coarses again.

RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

The slant nose design had less to do with aerodynamics and everything to do with front end down force. What has the greatest influence on how slick a car moves through the air is over-all frontal area. Take a picture of the front of a car from a dead-on front angle from about the height of the hood's leading edge. the smaller the car from that perspective the easier it will displace air and the faster it can go. The slant noses actually hurt the top end performance but had to be there to keep the noses from floating off the track. The sunken front can generate a high pressure zone but that is easily dealt with by well placed pressure relief cut-outs that allow the high pressure air to be funneled to low pressure zones.

RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: epegasus
The slant nose design had less to do with aerodynamics and everything to do with front end down force. What has the greatest influence on how slick a car moves through the air is over-all frontal area. Take a picture of the front of a car from a dead-on front angle from about the height of the hood's leading edge. the smaller the car from that perspective the easier it will displace air and the faster it can go. The slant noses actually hurt the top end performance but had to be there to keep the noses from floating off the track. The sunken front can generate a high pressure zone but that is easily dealt with by well placed pressure relief cut-outs that allow the high pressure air to be funneled to low pressure zones.

[quote]
Not sure I totally agree with you on the slant noses having little to do with aerodynamics, and that they actually hurt the top end performance. Chrysler did a lot of wind tunnel testing on the “Wingcars” to come up with the best aero package possible. However, due to the fact that they had to actually sell “street versions”, some compromises had to be made. If you refer to their wind tunnel report, you will find that the nose could have been shorter, but had to be made longer to mount the headlight doors, and even the wing could have been shorter, but was produced at a higher height to avoid interference with the deck lid. However, having said that two things were absolutely necessary to make the slant nose work properly:
1) Downward angle or stance of the front of the car (Less frontal area going through the air, and in turn placing the front spoiler closer to the track surface keeping air from under the car). *This was the reason for the Daytona and Superbird having rearward facing scoops on the front fenders. They were for added tire clearance, not to remove air pressure from the wheel well area.
2) The correct size and position of the front spoiler was an absolute necessity, without which the nose would create lift and making the car float off the track.

RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

I won't argue any of the slant nose comments cause I simply don't know enough about those cars but for the Ford products...

Look at a Tallagdega (street or NASCAR race car) vs. the standard Torino. You'll see that Ford moved the grill and headlights forward to meet the leading edge of the car (well, ok, they also added a little "slant" section in front of the hood) in order to minimize the concavity of the front end and allow air to go around the car that was not needed for cooling the engine. They also did a cool "trick" by using a rear bumper on the front because it was shaped better than the standard front bumper, as far as aero was concerned

RE: Challenger in NASCAR
 

You forgot to mention that Ford also rolled the rocker panels, which made it easlier for the race teams to "lower the body" on the frame.
If you look at the record book you will find that the Aero Fords and Mercurys win more races than the Wingcars......but the Wingcars left an impression on all those who raced against them (and the fans for that matter)
Bottomline...the fastback Ford/Mercury was a better starting point for a racer than the 68/69 Charger.
And, if anyone thinks that the Daytona and Superbird were not Aerodynamic....one look at how well the #22 Daytona was running in the 1971 Daytona 500 (before being taken out in an accident)..with a 305 vs the field of stock bodies running big blocks proves how important aero is at high speed.
Also, look at the records set by #71 Daytona team at the Salt flats and how long the records stood.