Windage Plates?


haha i made those, they have 3 layers of 5.7 oz carbon fiber in different directions, i run them on my viper, just remove the stock ones, the stock plates are made of galvanized steel, which is overkill IMO. I guess they are to protect the clutch but if there is something that is gona damage your clutch so bad that you need steel plates, you have bigger problems.

Im not sure on the exact weight I will weigh them tommorrow or thurs on a digital scale. But some say that 1lbs is equal to 7-10lbs of rotaing weight. im guessing they are close to a pound and the carbon ones are prob 10 times lighter.

I would apriciate others feed back on these pos or neg.
 
Last edited:
they are there to stop the drag created by the fins on the clutches. but the fins are there to help reduce clutch temps. if your cluts are running good (cool)you dont need the added cooling fron the fins and the plates reduce drag. how much they weigh or help i dont have a clue.

Pat
 
Carbon fibre is just shy of 5 times lighter than steel. I believe that both front and rear steel windage plates weigh in just under 1 pound so if they are similar in thickness, the carbon fiber should save about .7 pounds. Our aluminum plates save .46 pounds of weight so I would imagine another 1/4 pound of weight savings might be found with carbon fiber.
 
they ended up being about 1/2 the thickness of the steel, i made them as thin as possible to save the most weight. I will kno wfor sure how much they wiegh In a day or so.
 
It is that 1lb of rotating weight reduced is equivalent to removal of 10lbs of stationary weight. I think you did a neat job on them but the mph gain may not be quite there as claimed.

Nice job making them though!
 
well just mic'd them the stok is .035 (thought is was thicker then that) and the cf is .032-0.024 if you take a random measurement sense it is a cloth its hard to measure becasue the undersize isnt a perfectly smooth surface if i use a vernier inbetween the fibers i get .024. 3 layers is supoosivly. .021..
anyways i will get them on the scale soon, i cant wait to see the outcome.
 
mrviper700 said:
It is that 1lb of rotating weight reduced is equivalent to removal of 10lbs of stationary weight. I think you did a neat job on them but the mph gain may not be quite there as claimed.

Nice job making them though!
Click to expand...


yeah thats why i gave a wide range. Before i ran them i was having probs getting past the 170 mark only seen like twice mostly ran 166km an dit would bounce around, i hit 178 on the same stretch that i couldnt hit 170km on. switched to mph and hit 114. this is on the dreamo though. temps and conditions where the same if not worse. There may have been othere facters in play, I did take a big dump that day :rofl: . I have a new track and it may have finally just worn in properly.
So im pretty sure i gained at least 1mph.
 
No doubt that you gained something from the plates and I would have to agrewe that if you are capable of doing it, carbon fiber is the best way to make them. They look really good too. I am going to guess you saved right around .75 pounds with these plates. That is some good rotating mass too because of such a large diameter.
 
so put them on the scale today the steel plates whiegh in at 0.8lbs the carbon ones gave me 0.0 sens the scale i used dosn't go to two decimal places, but it would bounce up to one if you give it a little shake, guessing around .08lbs. so these will give you at least 7lbs savings of rotating mass. pretty close to .75lbs. Im sure it would be there without the clearcoat.

also want to mention if any members bid on them, i dont want you to be disipointed in the paint job, there is little pin holes in the paint sense i only did a dusting and didnt wetsand.
 
I bought these plates from conceptcarbon going to try them under the gun this weekend on the lake, i will run steel then without then with carbon and post results

Mike
 
cool curiuos on the outcome, just make sur eto run multiple runs with each and then take the ones that are way diff and through them out, then average the close ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top