Reply to "side scoops ?"

> I'm surprized the the Pantera has so much drag and yet it doesn't require
> signifigantly more hp to push it through the air then the GT40.

The drag is fairly close between the two vehicles. Even at the highest
speed in the table, the Pantera has only about 10% more drag. Given the
smaller frontal area of the GT40, that implies the drag coefficient of
the Pantera is as good or better than the GT40.

> I'll bet that the GT40 has front downforce because of the radiator
> configuration and exhaust ducting up and over the hood and winshield.

The Style Auto table says the GT40 had front end lift of 265 pounds at
162 MPH versus 300 pounds for the Pantera at the same speed. Not sure
which version of the GT40 that was but the GT40's aerodynamics were in
a constant state of evolution. The other table shows results of different
GT40 front spoiler designs that reduced the front lift from 540 to 236
pounds at 200 MPH. I also recall extensions being added to the front
corners below the headlights to generate downforce plus the radiator
exhaust changes.

> I do remember a drag coefficient being quoted for the Pantera of .29.
> Was it from this test? That's an impressive number even today.

I don't think that number was quoted in the Style Auto test.
I have one reference that shows a 1972 Pantera Pre-L as having:

Cd = 0.34
A = 18.23 square feet
Cd * A = 6.20

Assuming they ignored rolling resistance, I can get a decent match to
the HP required numbers in Style Auto for a value of Cd * A = 8.2035.
It may be the case they figured in a rolling resistance in the data.
I think the frontal area is in right ballpark. We can bracket the
frontal area on the high end by width times height and on the low end
by track times height. Using the specs on Pantera Place (from an August
1971 Car and Driver article):

A = 43.4 inches * 58 inches = 17.48 sq ft
A = 43.4 inches * 67 inches = 20.19 sq ft

Averaging the two numbers yields 18.835 which is close to the referenced
18.23 value. That area value would imply the coefficient of drag is 0.45
for the Style Auto data. That's relatively high so I wonder if they figured
in some sort of rolling resistance.

The Pre-L Pamteras had the chrome bumperettes and narrow tires. The later
L models had the rubber safety bumpers and may have been a bit slicker.
GT5-S had the Countach-like wings and flares. Those would have considerably
higher drag as well as larger frontal area.

> I know the Pantera needs help keeping the nose down. These numbers
> confirm that.

Yes.

> Too bad we can't see what items like a GTS chin spoiler or a Revson spoiler
> would do?

We'd need some wind tunnel time or CFD work.

> I have to presume that the Detomaso GT4-5 bat ear "window scoops" didn't
> just happen. Someone must have developed them. They are too strange looking
> to be a design exercise and not work.

Agreed.

> They do tend to remind me of the oil cooler scoops on the Lamborghini
> Countach for some reason though. Now that is a car that I question if
> anything really works on. I'm wondering if most of it is just 70's
> eye-techno-candy?

The clean version of the Countach, the LP5000 had severe stability problems
at speed. When they added all the ducting and wings, it took a big hit on
top speed but supposedly helped stability.

Dan Jones