vorticism wrote: ↑07 Jul 2023, 19:09
To me it shows why the rear pivot for upper arm was moved down so low (as well, the move to pullrod). Straight shot, maximal air into the sidepod undercut. Less about anti-dive, although that might be a side benefit. Also might serve to slightly reduce upwash from the high pressure bubble in front of the floor being hauled around from the inlet/ramp geometry.
While i don't feel it would hurt having the top rear leg there for aero effect, I do think that's a minimal consequence. That's against how opinion on here is going in regard to a it dive effect, but I'm happy to hold opposing view there.
Specifically, I dont feel those asking it have fully considered it's interaction with that top "crossbow" link and just how much effect that combination can have.
We don't know the specific details of that link along with it's torsional properties, and can't see how others can judge that fully without qualified facts. I do think the anti dive effects are an important part of THIS chassis overall performance that many have not fully appreciated though.
Interesting though as well in that same picture, the "blow through" brake duct/cowling. Looks like very minimal input air to brake tin, but with provision to create vacuum at rear edge to give maximum extraction to any hot air development in brake. That's as opposed to conventional thinking of big intake forcing pressured air at maximum into brake tin.
Also the flow control at foot of same structure to separate through flow air from tyre squirt consequence.