While the louvers on the Q400 are non-functional, I think it could be very easily modified (cut out rectangular sections on the engine side of the hood) to be a functional heat extractor hood and clear my "R" intake and help with aero as wells. Anyone have any thoughts or actual results on this particular hood (pending you've done the above modification)?
Steeda Q400 made functional?
- Thread starter CCM302
- Start date
I haven't done the above modification, but that would definitely work as an efficient heat extractor hood. However, I would not cut the entire section that is painted black on the factory cars, just the "vertical" slots like this: [ame="http://www.modulardepot.com/forums/showpost.php?p=890233&postcount=7"]http://www.modulardepot.com/forums/showpost.php?p=890233&postcount=7[/ame].
I see you're working on 5.4. You're going to need to go ahead and include some photos of that intake, m'kay. Are you fabbing up a look-a-like 2000 R manifold?
Last edited:
I have had the same thoughts. I am not sure that the louvers are at the correct angle though. You would most likely want to have a small lip grafted onto the hood at the first louver to get the air to pop up over the rest of the hood.
My response would be that the vents might work better if the coolant reservoir wasn't restricting the air flow out of the radiator. I thik maybe that's why they install the factory vents on the sides of the engine.
My hood at idle only blows air on the drivers side of the vents and on the passenger side under the car. At speed i'm sure air is being extracted thru both sides.
My hood at idle only blows air on the drivers side of the vents and on the passenger side under the car. At speed i'm sure air is being extracted thru both sides.
Yea, this is exactly how I was trying to explain it, sans pictures
I need to change my signature. It's actually going to be a 5.4 bored out to a 5.8/358. I bought the intake with a fabbed-up upper already with it. As far as pics, here ya go:
And my mock up with FGT heads
Yea. I figured as much. I'm schooled in the ways of aerodynamics/engineering in the theoretical (tripping boundary layers, flow separation, etc). They just don't give you much time for the practical while you're in school, unfortunately. Thus me posting this and asking for others' experience (if any at all) with this particular hood. Hopefully this doesn't come off as arrogant, as that is not the intent.
This is a little off topic, but I have done some experimenting and found that the flow separation for the rear windshield seems to occur about half way down. And that's with out vortex generators and the like. I think racebronco2 found the same to be true. I guess that tidbit is for others that may find this thread and are as interested in the aero as we are.
Yes i found out the same. I do wonder if the vg's help to put air on the rear wing. I do run the wing sometimes for the higher speed tracks. How do you think i can test the air on the wing.
The stock expansion tank can be done away with and a Cobra R degas bottle can be used with a catch can. This opens up the area above the stock radiator.
Air "on" the rear wing is much less important than air under the rear wing.
The basic idea of a wing (on an airplane) is to create lift. So, just turn the wing upside down and you have negative lift, or downforce. So, 99COBRA2881 is correct in saying air under the wing is more important. Air speeds up around corners edges/corners/spoilers. So, we need to keep the air from separating from the rear windshield long enough to get under our respective wings.
I know that vg's help to an extent. They do delay the flow separation. Racebronco2, I'm not sure if you'd be interested, but it looks like you have tags on your cobra and the vg's already installed ;-)...but you could take your car for a spin in the rain up to about 70mph (interstate/highway...wherever is safe) and point your in-car video camera towards the rear window. Let it run for a few minutes and look at the results. You could also do the old school "oil droplets" or "pieces of string taped to the window" test. Whichever is easier. I know my flow separates about half-way down (as previously mentioned) with my sirius radio attenna mounted on the roof on the back just before the windshield molding. Having multiple air spoilers/vg's before the rear window should be that much better. Or is it that your flow appears to separate about half-way down with the vg's in place?
Unrelated to the aero discussion, but I read that the original R intake had a short runner like this, but Ford/SVT extended it to improve (low end?) torque. You can see this metal tube extension in some of the early shots of the engine bay. Any plans to do this?
Edit: Of course, the inlet was on the front of the intake for the R, where yours is more on the side. Perhaps for clearance issues. You may be an expert on flow design, so I may be way off. In any event, intake looks great!
Last edited:
Yea, it would have been low end torque if they extended it because the longer the tube, the higher pressure/force the reverb wave will be when it actually rams into the heads. Hence it being called a "cross-ram" design. As far as that modification, I've never seen that. Do you have pictures illustrating this?
From the Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords "R Gang" article, third from the bottom...
00 vs 95 vs 93 Cobra R Article
You talking about the piece that looks like it doesn't belong between the throttle body and the rest of the upper intake?
The stock expansion tank can be done away with and a Cobra R degas bottle can be used with a catch can. This opens up the area above the stock radiator.
What are the disadvantages of this system?
I'm curious because of the vast difference in the amount of expansion space in the stock tank vs this tank. The fluid level must increase by about an inch after one session on the stock reservoir. Seems like this would just spew all the time out of the cap... I suppose that's what the catch can is for. Where is that mounted?
Last edited:
I already have done the window with string test and i do have it on video. The air seperates about 3/4 of the way down the rear window. My question is how do you test the air on and around the wing?
Well, as you can see from the pictures, the entrance is on the side, not towards the front like the R...and fortunately or unfortunately (we'll have to see what the dyno numbers are afterwards), I will have to extend mine because the throttle cable and TPS won't clear the rest of the upper intake. I'm not sure it will have the same effect that SVT was able to achieve through tuning, but hopefully runner length is runner length and it will yield similar results.
Disadvantages? If there are any I havent run across them yet. I put a two quart catch can in the driver side front fender well.
The degas bottle is empty when the car is cool, this gives the coolant room to expand when the engine warms up.
Its possible to do tuft tests on the rear wing also. Suction the go pro down on the vertical surface of the trunk lid looking up at the wing underside. This would be a simple test to measure before and after improvements but wouldn't give any calculable downforce numbers.
What rear wing are you using?
Aircraft use multiple rows of vgs on their wings to delay flow separation why couldn't we?
Users who are viewing this thread
