<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Downforce vs drag optimization at this circuit — the numbers]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">High-downforce setup costs approximately 12-15km/h on the straight. Low-downforce gains that straight speed back but loses 0.3-0.4s in the technical sector. At this specific circuit the break-even point historically favors low-downforce by 0.08s per lap overall. Teams that bring high-downforce packages here are making a trade.</p>
]]></description><link>https://spveforpit.com/topic/636/downforce-vs-drag-optimization-at-this-circuit-the-numbers</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2026 13:18:01 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://spveforpit.com/topic/636.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 21:27:47 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Downforce vs drag optimization at this circuit — the numbers on Wed, 22 Apr 2026 21:27:47 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">High-downforce setup costs approximately 12-15km/h on the straight. Low-downforce gains that straight speed back but loses 0.3-0.4s in the technical sector. At this specific circuit the break-even point historically favors low-downforce by 0.08s per lap overall. Teams that bring high-downforce packages here are making a trade.</p>
]]></description><link>https://spveforpit.com/post/1515</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://spveforpit.com/post/1515</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[bison4267]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 21:27:47 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>