Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Wing Tube

  1. #1
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default Wing Tube

    Looking to replace the front wing tube in my spare nose… it’s a bit on the heavy side. What would be considered normal / acceptable? Current tube is 1.125” in dia. with a .100 wall and it appears to be cold rolled steel… weighs about 5#. Some options:

    Cold rolled .100 wall is about 1.04 # per Ft. (what I have)

    4130 .058” about .75#
    4130 .035” about .40#

    2024 aluminum .095 about .37#.
    " “ “ .065 about .26#.

    Guess I could pull my good nose apart, but before I do I thought I see what the norm is.
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  2. #2
    Grand Pooh Bah Purple Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.03.01
    Location
    Havana, Fl, USA
    Posts
    10,803
    Liked: 3859

    Default

    Averill knows...


  3. #3
    Contributing Member
    Join Date
    05.29.02
    Location
    Great Falls, VA
    Posts
    2,245
    Liked: 8

    Default Reynard nose thru-tube

    Chrome-moly steel, .029 is the lightest, strongest way to go!

    Larry Oliver
    International Racing Products
    Larry Oliver

  4. #4
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple Frog View Post
    Averill knows...
    ... Figured that, but he's hard to call from work
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  5. #5
    Senior Member kea's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.17.00
    Location
    madison heights,mi
    Posts
    3,297
    Liked: 649

    Default Wing tube

    1.125" X .065" DOM
    Keith
    Averill Racing Stuff, Inc.
    www.racing-stuff.com
    248-585-9139

  6. #6
    Senior Member rickjohnson356's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.31.02
    Location
    decatur, GA
    Posts
    1,484
    Liked: 0

    Default Question for the experts..

    the front wing tube on my car is aluminum. Lots less weight than steel!

    any problem with lack of structural strength or other issues??

  7. #7
    Grand Pooh Bah Purple Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.03.01
    Location
    Havana, Fl, USA
    Posts
    10,803
    Liked: 3859

    Default

    I have seen aluminum wing poles collapse at about the black flag station on Road Atlanta's back straight. I believe it was Todd Bowman's car in March of '99. Allowed me my first ever regional win.

    I believe aluminum can work, if sized to carry the ~300 pounds at 143 mph.


  8. #8
    Contributing Member RobLav's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.05.00
    Location
    Somerset, Kentucky
    Posts
    2,914
    Liked: 126

    Default

    This time, I decided to try aluminum in my full length front wing on my new car. 6061-T6 at .090 thick. It sure is a lot lighter, but I worry about stress reversals. In a full length wing, as oppossed to the half front wings, the skin is taking some of the stresses. And that's why I decided to try it.

  9. #9
    Senior Member kea's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.17.00
    Location
    madison heights,mi
    Posts
    3,297
    Liked: 649

    Default wing tube

    Rob,
    Part of the equation here, is the OD of the tube. What works in .090" at one OD, may not, at a slightly smaller dimension. The steel tube does have some flexibility, where a more ridged material might be more likely to just break.
    Keith
    Averill Racing Stuff, Inc.
    www.racing-stuff.com
    248-585-9139

  10. #10
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RobLav View Post
    This time, I decided to try aluminum in my full length front wing on my new car. 6061-T6 at .090 thick. It sure is a lot lighter, but I worry about stress reversals. In a full length wing, as oppossed to the half front wings, the skin is taking some of the stresses. And that's why I decided to try it.
    That's one reason I was looking at 2024 instead of 6061, should handle the stress much better. I do have "half" wings, so the wing it's self doesn't give much support. 2024 has a yield strength that is roughly 10 percent higher and an ultimate strength of roughly 50 percent higher than 6061.

    2024 T3

    Ultimate Tensile Strength, psi70,000
    Yield Strength, psi50,000
    Brinell Hardness120
    Rockwell HardnessB75

    6061 T6

    Ultimate Tensile Strength, psi45,000
    Yield Strength, psi40,000
    Brinell Hardness95
    Rockwell HardnessB60

    4130

    Ultimate Tensile Strength, psi97,200
    Yield Strength, psi63,100
    Elongation25.5%
    Rockwell HardnessB92

    DOM

    Ultimate Tensile Strength, psi87,000
    Yield Strength, psi72,000
    Elongation10.0%
    Rockwell HardnessB89

    My spare nose/wing is MUCH heavier then my best one... reducing the weight of the tube will help quite a bit, also make it safer in that the tube is much stronger then anything on my car or anyone I'd come into contact with.
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  11. #11
    Contributing Member RussMcB's Avatar
    Join Date
    03.19.02
    Location
    Palm Coast, FL
    Posts
    6,693
    Liked: 562

    Default

    One time I bumped the car ahead in the early part of lap 1 in a race. The right front wing was bent upwards pretty drastically. The race went full course yellow. I was glad that a crew guy on pit road was able to "step" on my wing and get it relatively flat again. I was able to continue without much drama. IIRC, later I gave it a good straightening and it was fine. It may still be on the car.
    Racer Russ
    Palm Coast, FL

  12. #12
    Contributing Member rickb99's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.24.02
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    4,913
    Liked: 210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azjc View Post
    My spare nose/wing is MUCH heavier then my best one... reducing the weight of the tube will help quite a bit.
    Which flavor of nose is your spare AZ?

    We have "pointy" modern nose withi Averill wings. In the process of garage activities last weekend, Jeff picked up our original old snub nose with the original old wings (not what he wants to run), but we did notice this old 'thing' was lighter then the new modern nose. Not sure of the weight difference but it's 'noticable'. It could be because of the shorter less functional wings on the car as sold.

    But that's not why I'm making a post. I'm curious on another angle of this.

    1.
    How much weight savings do you figure the change in material will give you?

    2.
    As we are about 50 pounds over weight (with the new 1200 min) with the modern nose, I'm trying to figure out how to get some weight off the car. The 87-92 Reynards came in 'factory trim' with a 60/40 back to front weight distribution. Obviously pretty biased toward the rear already as is true in a lot of formula cars.

    What I'm wondering is, is the trade off of whatever weight savings you can make on the front (be it wing tubes or whatever) really an improvement considering your increasing the rear weight bias? Or, can the small weight savings on the front be offset with a lower ride height and maybe rake change?

    Of course if this were an unsprung weight reduction in wheels, calipers, etc. this wouldn't be a question.

    We also ran 2008 with the full rear clam shell. That thing is pretty heavy. I'm going to encourage Jeff to try a few sessions without it this year.

    I'm thinking the best improvement would be to have a foundry cast us an aluminum block! KIDDING CRB ! ! !
    CREW for Jeff 89 Reynard or Flag & Comm.

  13. #13
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb99 View Post
    Which flavor of nose is your spare AZ?

    1.
    How much weight savings do you figure the change in material will give you?

    2.
    As we are about 50 pounds over weight (with the new 1200 min) with the modern nose, I'm trying to figure out how to get some weight off the car.
    I've not bothered to figure out which nose is which... guess I could post pictures or check the records that came with the car. This one is more "pointy" (and in need of a few repairs - tube is very loose on one side), my newest may be an original design but done in light weight material, I've also got a well used raised nose.

    Wheight savings - think of the lever ratio (I've not calculated it) and where the weight is, the worse area you can: way out front. In the range of 3# if I go the way I'm leaning to, but it would be more when you consider the lever ratio

    Car is now drivable again (first time since I bought it) so it goes on the scales this weekend to set corner weights (and alignment) so I'll know the weight then.

    In a way this about having a big ugly heavy tube where something lighter would be better . Also don't like the way it appears to be way too stiff, I'd rather have somthing that gives when needed (like a crush box ).

    I do have an original rear wing that came with the spares - it's tube is WAY lighter, maybe I'll check it's size too.
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  14. #14
    Contributing Member SWMyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    07.11.01
    Location
    Saline, MI
    Posts
    354
    Liked: 20

    Default Reynard Weight

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb99 View Post
    As we are about 50 pounds over weight (with the new 1200 min) with the modern nose, I'm trying to figure out how to get some weight off the car. The 87-92 Reynards came in 'factory trim' with a 60/40 back to front weight distribution. Obviously pretty biased toward the rear already as is true in a lot of formula cars.
    You should be able to get closer to minimum. I've seen a Reynard with a welded steel floor pan under 1200 lbs. A couple of areas you might want to look at. The original brake rotors are very heavy. A set of thin rotors with aluminum hats could save 2+ lbs. each. Lightened CV's can save a some as well, when you consider you have 4 of them. Aluminum radiators help too. Also, you may want to take a look at your body work. I've seen some big differences in some of the main cockpit pieces, depending on who made is and how many times its been repaired.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    07.23.06
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    145
    Liked: 0

    Default

    Thanks for the advice Steve; I'd be up for taking weight off the car any way possible, unfortunately we have lightened CV's and aluminum rads on the car as of right now. I have looked into drilled brake rotors and would like make that swap at some point, but I suspect the bulk our issue is 1) bodywork, and 2) I'm a pretty good size kid at 6'2" 205 lbs (vegetarian and work out /run daily); not much of that weight is coming off unless I literally resort to a strict diet of tree bark and dirt or, as Rick Johnson suggested to me last summer, go in for a strategic amputation.

  16. #16
    Senior Member kea's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.17.00
    Location
    madison heights,mi
    Posts
    3,297
    Liked: 649

    Default reducing weight

    I love drill rotors, I like the increased brake pad sales.
    Like Steve said, there is possibly some big weight differences in the body panels, depending on how many times it's been "repaired". And the alloy hat/rotor combination, can save a fair amount of weight, to the later (90) style Reynard rotors, but will be minimal to those original early (88) rotors, which had large holes in the hat area.
    Keith
    Averill Racing Stuff, Inc.
    www.racing-stuff.com
    248-585-9139

  17. #17
    Contributing Member rickb99's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.24.02
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    4,913
    Liked: 210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kea View Post
    I love drill rotors, I like the increased brake pad sales.
    Gosh Keith! Just what we need is spending more money on brake pads. The KFP's are holding up really well at the moment, thank you very much!

    ICP's lightened rotors and hats. Very good stuff and all unsprung weight at that. But a huge investment for us.

    I just now put that rear clam shell on a scale. That's 10 pounds of body work right there and it would take weight off the 'correct' end of the car! A trade off in external aerodynamic flow (maybe) versus the associated pressure build up (and heat) in the engine compartment. I think it's worth trying some laps without it.

    Who knows, if it works, might have to order a 24/25 4th
    CREW for Jeff 89 Reynard or Flag & Comm.

  18. #18
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default Weight

    My "good" nose is from Larry Oliver & light weight, 1 side pod (new style) and 1 engine cover are new & light weight (engine cover from Larry also), other side pod and engine cover are older and heavier (not much), main body is quite light. Has the rotors with large holes in hat area but nothing else that I can see to lighten the car (no alum rad's), no major repairs to make it heavier. With mods to car so I can fit there was a net gain of about 4#.

    W/ 3 gal of fuel, 6 quarts oil, trans, diff & coolant topped off, all bodywork on ready to race the car weighs exactly 1,200# with my son in the car. He weighed 207#, I weigh 195# so with my gear on the car should weigh right about 1,200#... at least that is what my M.A.D. scales show .

    We'll find out the real weight when I take it down for an annual SCCA tech. Local tech people said they'd be glad to weigh (and tech) it during a race weekend, just bring it down & they'd do it between sessions.
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  19. #19
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default Drilled rotors

    Quote Originally Posted by kea View Post
    I love drill rotors, I like the increased brake pad sales.
    Like Steve said, there is possibly some big weight differences in the body panels, depending on how many times it's been "repaired". And the alloy hat/rotor combination, can save a fair amount of weight, to the later (90) style Reynard rotors, but will be minimal to those original early (88) rotors, which had large holes in the hat area.
    On the BMW's we used to see drilled rotors crack between the holes, but using Alpina rotors with the holes cast into it there was no problem.
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  20. #20
    Contributing Member rickb99's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.24.02
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    4,913
    Liked: 210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by azjc View Post
    W/ 3 gal of fuel, 6 quarts oil, trans, diff & coolant topped off, all bodywork on ready to race the car weighs exactly 1,200# with my son in the car. He weighed 207#,
    Well I'm sure those drilled hats wouldn't save us 40 pounds

    3 gallons of fuel won't cut it for us. We run 20 minute practice sessions and 30 minute races with typically 2.25 mile pace laps and a long run to pre-grid. I figure a touch over 4 gallons for a race (but that is prerace so it doesn't count).

    What we really need is a GOOD accurate weight. Last year we only went across a 'post race' verification beam scale once (running FS so not really needed) and came out at 1253. This year we have an FC class and need to hit the 1200, or try any way.
    CREW for Jeff 89 Reynard or Flag & Comm.

  21. #21
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default Fuel

    Quote Originally Posted by rickb99 View Post

    3 gallons of fuel won't cut it for us. We run 20 minute practice sessions and 30 minute races with typically 2.25 mile pace laps and a long run to pre-grid.
    Weight is taken at the end of the session or race... so if I had a gal of fuel left at the end I'd be under weight... providing my scales are accurate .
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

  22. #22
    Senior Member kea's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.17.00
    Location
    madison heights,mi
    Posts
    3,297
    Liked: 649

    Default weights

    azjc. If you decide to change to alloy Rad's, so you can ballast the car (like in the front), just give me a call.
    Keith
    Averill Racing Stuff, Inc.
    www.racing-stuff.com
    248-585-9139

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    08.18.02
    Location
    Indy, IN
    Posts
    6,341
    Liked: 1963

    Default

    In seleting a tube material, remember that not only is strength necessary - in particular fatigue strength - but stiffness is critical, especially on cars where the wing is in very close proximity to the the ground. Sticking in an alu pole when it was designed for steel could cause the wing to drag on the ground.

    Steel has a slightly better stiffness/weight ratio than aluminium (depending on the alloy), so to get the same stiffness, the aluminium pole has to be at least as heavy, if not heavier - assuming, of course, that you are limited to the same OD in either version.

  24. #24
    Senior Member kea's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.17.00
    Location
    madison heights,mi
    Posts
    3,297
    Liked: 649

    Default wing tube

    Thank you Richard, for bring that important point up.
    Keith
    Averill Racing Stuff, Inc.
    www.racing-stuff.com
    248-585-9139

  25. #25
    Contributing Member azjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    10.08.07
    Location
    Florance, AZ
    Posts
    656
    Liked: 34

    Default Rad's

    Quote Originally Posted by kea View Post
    azjc. If you decide to change to alloy Rad's, so you can ballast the car (like in the front), just give me a call.
    That's on my list for the future... should have the car back on the track mid March, run it a bit in the Pro Auto Sport /ASA to shake it down. Then SCCA school to relicense in September, run thru the end of the '09 ~'10 season (spring for us in hot AZ)... then do a complete tear down so I can do all those things I've been putting on a list while going thru the car over the last few months.

    But I'm still having fun, been great therapy in a world full of stress ... but looking forward to actually driving the car more then around the neighborhood!
    John H.
    Reynard 88SF

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




About Us
Since 2000, ApexSpeed.com has been the go-to place for amateur road racing enthusiasts, bringing together a friendly community of racers, fans, and industry professionals. We're all about creating a space where people can connect, share knowledge, and exchange parts and vehicles, with a focus on specific race cars, classes, series, and events. Our community includes all major purpose-built road racing classes, like the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) and various pro series across North America and beyond. At ApexSpeed, we're passionate about amateur motorsports and are dedicated to helping our community have fun and grow while creating lasting memories on and off the track.
Social