| peepers | 02-19-2003 10:32 AM |
do wings work?
�
�
Maybe its a silly question, but for street driving and auto crossing where speeds don't get [I]that[/I] high, do wings on cars really have any effect?
i bet they do when traveling very fast and that is why almost all race cars have them but there are a handful of rally cars that don't and fast autobahn cruisers like the M5, M3 and huge AMG mercedes don't...
so, do they really work or just look cool? is it possible they actaully make the airflow worse at the speeds we travel?
please inform...
i bet they do when traveling very fast and that is why almost all race cars have them but there are a handful of rally cars that don't and fast autobahn cruisers like the M5, M3 and huge AMG mercedes don't...
so, do they really work or just look cool? is it possible they actaully make the airflow worse at the speeds we travel?
please inform...
| QfactorRS | 02-19-2003 10:51 AM |
i remember i did the calculation back in the days when i was in physics classes, it came out that any wing would have no effect at speeds under 70mph, or the downforce is minimal, between 70 and 110, the force was increased but there is no point since the tires are still on the ground, so it slows you down more than anything else. Above those speed, the design of the roof and the position of the wing on the trunk become very important factors and it becomes hard to generalize.
If you give me a specific wing to do calculation from, then i can give you specifics.
but my opinion is that for auto X or highway cruising there is no need for a wing.
FYI, i drive above 110 very often, and i never came even close to loosing rear tire traction:rolleyes:
Q
If you give me a specific wing to do calculation from, then i can give you specifics.
but my opinion is that for auto X or highway cruising there is no need for a wing.
FYI, i drive above 110 very often, and i never came even close to loosing rear tire traction:rolleyes:
Q
| peepers | 02-19-2003 10:55 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by QfactorRS [/i]
[B]but my opinion is that for auto X or highway cruising there is no need for a wing.
Q [/B][/QUOTE]
this is my opinion as well, but since so many people have them and spend so much money on them i was wondering if i am missing the boat and they do add performance... they cost so much! at least i can argue my morette HIDs are safer because i can see better...
[B]but my opinion is that for auto X or highway cruising there is no need for a wing.
Q [/B][/QUOTE]
this is my opinion as well, but since so many people have them and spend so much money on them i was wondering if i am missing the boat and they do add performance... they cost so much! at least i can argue my morette HIDs are safer because i can see better...
| kenchan | 02-19-2003 11:20 AM |
yes, try lane changes at high speeds with and without
a wing. big difference especially on wet roads and if you have
aftermarket sus on factory tires.
also, i always thought lip spoilers were just cosmetic, but
when you drop your car 2inches and get one of those large STI
lips (i use a V2) i can tell a difference in lift characteristics
at higher speed lane changes. the smaller lips and factory
ride height/soft sus, i dont think you can tell.
a wing. big difference especially on wet roads and if you have
aftermarket sus on factory tires.
also, i always thought lip spoilers were just cosmetic, but
when you drop your car 2inches and get one of those large STI
lips (i use a V2) i can tell a difference in lift characteristics
at higher speed lane changes. the smaller lips and factory
ride height/soft sus, i dont think you can tell.
| QfactorRS | 02-19-2003 11:33 AM |
well, i didn't say anything about front lips.
the front of the car is affected by air flow at far lower speeds than the rear.
for best handling, it is true that one would want a front and rear spoiler to increase the downforce on both ends of the car identically.
I found that wings/spoilers/ front air dams are not necessary on my car as it stays very stable at its max speed. Plus spoiler and front lips only increase the cx of our cars, which is already really pretty high compared to other cars now days, all this only increases the mpg.
Q <- very happy with my car's setup, but we all have different likings.
the front of the car is affected by air flow at far lower speeds than the rear.
for best handling, it is true that one would want a front and rear spoiler to increase the downforce on both ends of the car identically.
I found that wings/spoilers/ front air dams are not necessary on my car as it stays very stable at its max speed. Plus spoiler and front lips only increase the cx of our cars, which is already really pretty high compared to other cars now days, all this only increases the mpg.
Q <- very happy with my car's setup, but we all have different likings.
| satrya | 02-21-2003 05:59 PM |
Most arguments on aerofoils (wings in particular) are based on how much downforce they provide. While I think providing downforce is important, it shouldn't be the only thing to evaluate. There are at least 2 other factors that I could think of: (1) drag, and (2) lift.
(1) drag
Suppose we assume that a wing has a simple flat cross section, then, as the angle of attack is increased, both downforce and drag will increase. Iirc, there was an article in Road&Track on wings used in F1 cars, in which the wings that create so much downforce also created so much drag that it can slow down the car from 100 to some near zero speed amazingly fast (I don't remember the numbers, but I think it was equivalent to the braking performance of commercial cars with regular brakes). While F1 cars could afford the additional drag, imho, a street spoiler with an agressive angle of attack would not be a practical one. This might be one of the reasons most OEM wings do not have extreme angle of attack, and may seem like it does nothing. (again, that is not to say that there are oem wings that really do nothing).
(2) lift
For most cars, the air that travels through the bottom of the car will have a much shorter path than the air that gets deflected upwards from the bumper, then to the hood, windshield, roof, and then to the back(Think VW beetle, Audi TT, or porsche). The cross section is similar to the wing of an aircraft, along with its natural lift tendency. A VW beetle would be the ideal example for this, where the arching shape causes a great amount of lift(ref: Bernoulli's principle), particularly in the back. Placing a wing in the right place somewhere in the back, even if it makes a zero angle of attack (with respect to the horizontal plane), can "detach" the flow from the rear windshield and trunk. As a result, the wing reduces "bad" lift.
Even a flat wing could help reduce drag. For example, in most sedans, there is a sudden change in the roofline caused by the rear windshield. This generates turbulence, which causes drag. Placing the flat wing in the right place would minimize/reduce turbulence, thus minimizing/reducing drag.
Of course, these are rather simplistic point of views; but my point is that I think the usefulness of an aerofoil (wings, skirts, canards,...) should be looked at based on more than how much downforce it can create. Imho, a good aerofoil for regular cars are ones that reduces drag (=better fuel efficiency) and reduces the rear-end lift (=better stability). Having extra downforce is nice, but is probably not as essential.
(1) drag
Suppose we assume that a wing has a simple flat cross section, then, as the angle of attack is increased, both downforce and drag will increase. Iirc, there was an article in Road&Track on wings used in F1 cars, in which the wings that create so much downforce also created so much drag that it can slow down the car from 100 to some near zero speed amazingly fast (I don't remember the numbers, but I think it was equivalent to the braking performance of commercial cars with regular brakes). While F1 cars could afford the additional drag, imho, a street spoiler with an agressive angle of attack would not be a practical one. This might be one of the reasons most OEM wings do not have extreme angle of attack, and may seem like it does nothing. (again, that is not to say that there are oem wings that really do nothing).
(2) lift
For most cars, the air that travels through the bottom of the car will have a much shorter path than the air that gets deflected upwards from the bumper, then to the hood, windshield, roof, and then to the back(Think VW beetle, Audi TT, or porsche). The cross section is similar to the wing of an aircraft, along with its natural lift tendency. A VW beetle would be the ideal example for this, where the arching shape causes a great amount of lift(ref: Bernoulli's principle), particularly in the back. Placing a wing in the right place somewhere in the back, even if it makes a zero angle of attack (with respect to the horizontal plane), can "detach" the flow from the rear windshield and trunk. As a result, the wing reduces "bad" lift.
Even a flat wing could help reduce drag. For example, in most sedans, there is a sudden change in the roofline caused by the rear windshield. This generates turbulence, which causes drag. Placing the flat wing in the right place would minimize/reduce turbulence, thus minimizing/reducing drag.
Of course, these are rather simplistic point of views; but my point is that I think the usefulness of an aerofoil (wings, skirts, canards,...) should be looked at based on more than how much downforce it can create. Imho, a good aerofoil for regular cars are ones that reduces drag (=better fuel efficiency) and reduces the rear-end lift (=better stability). Having extra downforce is nice, but is probably not as essential.
| satrya | 02-21-2003 06:03 PM |
Btw, I found a link talking about some aerodynamic effects. Btw, it has a pic of an STi (version IV?).
[url]http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/aero/tech_aero.htm[/url]
[url]http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/aero/tech_aero.htm[/url]
| Black_Rain | 02-21-2003 08:02 PM |
Hey...i didnt read this whole thread so it may have been covered.... Wings are very effective in AutoX and for dragsters... For AutoX they are not meant for the back wheels to "hug" the ground....they are meant for handling...they will keep the rear end from not spinning out...
Also for dragsters...and high speeds....they are meant to keep the back wheels tighter on the ground....For example, look and old Mopar SuperBee....these babies had huge wings...thats because they were basically early nascars...these wings helped in both keeping the wheels on the ground and stabilizing the back end through turns....wings are ver good for cars....
For front wheel drive cars....THEY SUCK...thats why if you are a ricer and have a huge wing....it makes the car go slower...it creates not downforce...and their stupid cars dont go fast enough to create and help through turns....so if you have a big wing and you want to go test your car at a 1/4 mile track...take off the wing...it will create more drag and since you have a subie....you wont need the traction on the back wheels...."The beauty of All Wheel Drive."
Also for dragsters...and high speeds....they are meant to keep the back wheels tighter on the ground....For example, look and old Mopar SuperBee....these babies had huge wings...thats because they were basically early nascars...these wings helped in both keeping the wheels on the ground and stabilizing the back end through turns....wings are ver good for cars....
For front wheel drive cars....THEY SUCK...thats why if you are a ricer and have a huge wing....it makes the car go slower...it creates not downforce...and their stupid cars dont go fast enough to create and help through turns....so if you have a big wing and you want to go test your car at a 1/4 mile track...take off the wing...it will create more drag and since you have a subie....you wont need the traction on the back wheels...."The beauty of All Wheel Drive."
| N'CTRL | 02-21-2003 08:25 PM |
Functional wings.
[IMG]http://www.wrx-turbo.co.uk/Impreza_Flag_Big.jpg[/IMG]
Mike~~
[IMG]http://www.wrx-turbo.co.uk/Impreza_Flag_Big.jpg[/IMG]
Mike~~
| Speed Revelation | 02-22-2003 07:44 AM |
That pic gives me an adrenaline rush everytime I see it! MUST HAVE.... NOW! :p
Until I save up for the UK 300 parts... it's only fantasy :rolleyes:
I'll get there eventually. ;)
Btw, yeah.... most spoilers are just cosmetics and make the car look really good. That's why they in high demand and cost so much in the aftermarket and even factory spoiler world. The ones that are wind tunnel tested and proven are the ones that are functional. Otherwise, just another piece on the car just for style.
Speed Revelation
Until I save up for the UK 300 parts... it's only fantasy :rolleyes:
I'll get there eventually. ;)
Btw, yeah.... most spoilers are just cosmetics and make the car look really good. That's why they in high demand and cost so much in the aftermarket and even factory spoiler world. The ones that are wind tunnel tested and proven are the ones that are functional. Otherwise, just another piece on the car just for style.
Speed Revelation
| Chuck H | 02-22-2003 12:14 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Black_Rain [/i]
[B]Hey...i didnt read this whole thread so it may have been covered.... Wings are very effective in AutoX and for dragsters... For AutoX they are not meant for the back wheels to "hug" the ground....they are meant for handling...they will keep the rear end from not spinning out...
Also for dragsters...and high speeds....they are meant to keep the back wheels tighter on the ground....For example, look and old Mopar SuperBee....these babies had huge wings...thats because they were basically early nascars...these wings helped in both keeping the wheels on the ground and stabilizing the back end through turns....wings are ver good for cars....
For front wheel drive cars....THEY SUCK...thats why if you are a ricer and have a huge wing....it makes the car go slower...it creates not downforce...and their stupid cars dont go fast enough to create and help through turns....so if you have a big wing and you want to go test your car at a 1/4 mile track...take off the wing...it will create more drag and since you have a subie....you wont need the traction on the back wheels...."The beauty of All Wheel Drive." [/B][/QUOTE]
You don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about. Autocrossing doesn't see high enough speeds for a wing to make any difference on any kind of normal car. You say that wings aren't meant to make the rear wheels "hug the ground", but that they keep the car from spinning out. The only way that could do that is by generating downforce, which they can't do very much of at low autocross speeds.
And saying that a car doesn't need to have traction on the back wheels because you have AWD is nonsense as well. If you're trying to put the power to the ground effectively, you want all 4 wheels to have traction.
[B]Hey...i didnt read this whole thread so it may have been covered.... Wings are very effective in AutoX and for dragsters... For AutoX they are not meant for the back wheels to "hug" the ground....they are meant for handling...they will keep the rear end from not spinning out...
Also for dragsters...and high speeds....they are meant to keep the back wheels tighter on the ground....For example, look and old Mopar SuperBee....these babies had huge wings...thats because they were basically early nascars...these wings helped in both keeping the wheels on the ground and stabilizing the back end through turns....wings are ver good for cars....
For front wheel drive cars....THEY SUCK...thats why if you are a ricer and have a huge wing....it makes the car go slower...it creates not downforce...and their stupid cars dont go fast enough to create and help through turns....so if you have a big wing and you want to go test your car at a 1/4 mile track...take off the wing...it will create more drag and since you have a subie....you wont need the traction on the back wheels...."The beauty of All Wheel Drive." [/B][/QUOTE]
You don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about. Autocrossing doesn't see high enough speeds for a wing to make any difference on any kind of normal car. You say that wings aren't meant to make the rear wheels "hug the ground", but that they keep the car from spinning out. The only way that could do that is by generating downforce, which they can't do very much of at low autocross speeds.
And saying that a car doesn't need to have traction on the back wheels because you have AWD is nonsense as well. If you're trying to put the power to the ground effectively, you want all 4 wheels to have traction.
| The Ru | 02-22-2003 12:18 PM |
[QUOTE]You don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]
I Second Chuck H's opinion!
ian
I Second Chuck H's opinion!
ian
| N'CTRL | 02-22-2003 01:38 PM |
Just to add to the bashing, the SuperBee's wing was so high simply because the trunk wouldn't open if it were any lower.
Mike~~
Mike~~
| The Ru | 02-22-2003 02:34 PM |
[QUOTE]Just to add to the bashing, the SuperBee's wing was so high simply because the trunk wouldn't open if it were any lower.[/QUOTE]
But the superbee/daytona wings did have HUGE downforce #'s. I dont wanna say a # and be wrong, but i know it was big.
ian
But the superbee/daytona wings did have HUGE downforce #'s. I dont wanna say a # and be wrong, but i know it was big.
ian
| Black_Rain | 02-22-2003 03:34 PM |
Ok...I know many guys disagree w/ me... But last week i was just watching AutoX on Speed and it mentiond about a company (i forget which one) putting a bigger wing on the AutoX car b/c it was very "squirely" through the corners. I assumed thats b/c of the downforce that it creates. So if "autocrossing doesnt see enough high speeds to make any difference on normal cars" then why did that company say that.
Also when i said about hugging the ground...i meant for AutoX...of course you need traction...but thats not the main reason the wings are there....
And when i was reffering to AWD and the wings...I was saying that if you have a FWD, downforce (if you can create it) on the back wheels will not help you launch or get traction. The simply are for cosmetics and on the strip...create drag. For AWD...yeah of course its good to have traction...but the little downforce that is made at a launch will not help AWD that much.
Top-Fuel dragsters have these huge wings b/c they need the downforce throughout the whole strip...they dont help that much in launch...but when the car gets going the wheels still want to spin out....thats b/c of how much power they have...of course there are other factors keeping the wheels on the ground also, but the wings do help. So before you get mad at me...try to understand what i'm saying. Thanks.
Also when i said about hugging the ground...i meant for AutoX...of course you need traction...but thats not the main reason the wings are there....
And when i was reffering to AWD and the wings...I was saying that if you have a FWD, downforce (if you can create it) on the back wheels will not help you launch or get traction. The simply are for cosmetics and on the strip...create drag. For AWD...yeah of course its good to have traction...but the little downforce that is made at a launch will not help AWD that much.
Top-Fuel dragsters have these huge wings b/c they need the downforce throughout the whole strip...they dont help that much in launch...but when the car gets going the wheels still want to spin out....thats b/c of how much power they have...of course there are other factors keeping the wheels on the ground also, but the wings do help. So before you get mad at me...try to understand what i'm saying. Thanks.
| 944 turbo guy | 02-22-2003 05:37 PM |
Just wingin' it..........
�
�
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by satrya [/i]
[B]Most arguments on aerofoils (wings in particular) are based on how much downforce they provide. While I think providing downforce is important, it shouldn't be the only thing to evaluate. There are at least 2 other factors that I could think of: (1) drag, and (2) lift.
(1) drag
Suppose we assume that a wing has a simple flat cross section, then, as the angle of attack is increased, both downforce and drag will increase. Iirc, there was an article in Road&Track on wings used in F1 cars, in which the wings that create so much downforce also created so much drag that it can slow down the car from 100 to some near zero speed amazingly fast (I don't remember the numbers, but I think it was equivalent to the braking performance of commercial cars with regular brakes). While F1 cars could afford the additional drag, imho, a street spoiler with an agressive angle of attack would not be a practical one. This might be one of the reasons most OEM wings do not have extreme angle of attack, and may seem like it does nothing. (again, that is not to say that there are oem wings that really do nothing).
(2) lift
For most cars, the air that travels through the bottom of the car will have a much shorter path than the air that gets deflected upwards from the bumper, then to the hood, windshield, roof, and then to the back(Think VW beetle, Audi TT, or porsche). The cross section is similar to the wing of an aircraft, along with its natural lift tendency. A VW beetle would be the ideal example for this, where the arching shape causes a great amount of lift(ref: Bernoulli's principle), particularly in the back. Placing a wing in the right place somewhere in the back, even if it makes a zero angle of attack (with respect to the horizontal plane), can "detach" the flow from the rear windshield and trunk. As a result, the wing reduces "bad" lift.
Even a flat wing could help reduce drag. For example, in most sedans, there is a sudden change in the roofline caused by the rear windshield. This generates turbulence, which causes drag. Placing the flat wing in the right place would minimize/reduce turbulence, thus minimizing/reducing drag.
Of course, these are rather simplistic point of views; but my point is that I think the usefulness of an aerofoil (wings, skirts, canards,...) should be looked at based on more than how much downforce it can create. Imho, a good aerofoil for regular cars are ones that reduces drag (=better fuel efficiency) and reduces the rear-end lift (=better stability). Having extra downforce is nice, but is probably not as essential. [/B][/QUOTE]
After having said all that,..not once do I hear you make mention of Suspension setup, spring rates, and or braking bias as it relates to "wings and splitters",...'cause without that everything you just said could stay in the books, because it wouldnt matter .
so lets open the "forum" up,...explain it taking what I just said into account.............
944 turbo guy.
[B]Most arguments on aerofoils (wings in particular) are based on how much downforce they provide. While I think providing downforce is important, it shouldn't be the only thing to evaluate. There are at least 2 other factors that I could think of: (1) drag, and (2) lift.
(1) drag
Suppose we assume that a wing has a simple flat cross section, then, as the angle of attack is increased, both downforce and drag will increase. Iirc, there was an article in Road&Track on wings used in F1 cars, in which the wings that create so much downforce also created so much drag that it can slow down the car from 100 to some near zero speed amazingly fast (I don't remember the numbers, but I think it was equivalent to the braking performance of commercial cars with regular brakes). While F1 cars could afford the additional drag, imho, a street spoiler with an agressive angle of attack would not be a practical one. This might be one of the reasons most OEM wings do not have extreme angle of attack, and may seem like it does nothing. (again, that is not to say that there are oem wings that really do nothing).
(2) lift
For most cars, the air that travels through the bottom of the car will have a much shorter path than the air that gets deflected upwards from the bumper, then to the hood, windshield, roof, and then to the back(Think VW beetle, Audi TT, or porsche). The cross section is similar to the wing of an aircraft, along with its natural lift tendency. A VW beetle would be the ideal example for this, where the arching shape causes a great amount of lift(ref: Bernoulli's principle), particularly in the back. Placing a wing in the right place somewhere in the back, even if it makes a zero angle of attack (with respect to the horizontal plane), can "detach" the flow from the rear windshield and trunk. As a result, the wing reduces "bad" lift.
Even a flat wing could help reduce drag. For example, in most sedans, there is a sudden change in the roofline caused by the rear windshield. This generates turbulence, which causes drag. Placing the flat wing in the right place would minimize/reduce turbulence, thus minimizing/reducing drag.
Of course, these are rather simplistic point of views; but my point is that I think the usefulness of an aerofoil (wings, skirts, canards,...) should be looked at based on more than how much downforce it can create. Imho, a good aerofoil for regular cars are ones that reduces drag (=better fuel efficiency) and reduces the rear-end lift (=better stability). Having extra downforce is nice, but is probably not as essential. [/B][/QUOTE]
After having said all that,..not once do I hear you make mention of Suspension setup, spring rates, and or braking bias as it relates to "wings and splitters",...'cause without that everything you just said could stay in the books, because it wouldnt matter .
so lets open the "forum" up,...explain it taking what I just said into account.............
944 turbo guy.
| NimrodBoz | 02-22-2003 06:07 PM |
in case anyone is interested, one of the few companys that actually windtunnel-tests their wings for usefulness is c-west. all c-west aero equipment should be actually useful. for an example of how useful wings can be despite their weight look at the new Impreza WRC. its wing features 6 vertical fins in addition to the horizontal top piece. allegedly that wing does wonders for the car but i dont see them (subaru) making too much WRC ehadway unfortunately :(
| satrya | 02-23-2003 12:12 PM |
Re: Just wingin' it..........
�
�
[QUOTE][B]After having said all that,..not once do I hear you make mention of Suspension setup, spring rates, and or braking bias as it relates to "wings and splitters",...'cause without that everything you just said could stay in the books, because it wouldnt matter .
so lets open the "forum" up,...explain it taking what I just said into account.............[/B][/QUOTE]
I didn't mention about those other factors you brought up. My point is, in the previous replies, the focus on the usefullness of a wing is evaluated from whether or not it provides downforce. My reply argues that there are other issues, such as drag and lift, that should also be taken into account for. If you or anyone else wants to relate the usefullness of wings/aerofoils to other factors, that's fine with me. But that doesn't negate my point (that downforce isn't the only thing to look into).
so lets open the "forum" up,...explain it taking what I just said into account.............[/B][/QUOTE]
I didn't mention about those other factors you brought up. My point is, in the previous replies, the focus on the usefullness of a wing is evaluated from whether or not it provides downforce. My reply argues that there are other issues, such as drag and lift, that should also be taken into account for. If you or anyone else wants to relate the usefullness of wings/aerofoils to other factors, that's fine with me. But that doesn't negate my point (that downforce isn't the only thing to look into).
| rohde88 | 02-23-2003 09:11 PM |
I contend almost vertical spoilers do help even in relatively low speed autocross
[URL=http:[email�protected]/vwp?.dir=/Equipe+Rapide+SCC/ER062302&.src=ph&.dnm=PIC046.jpg&.view=t&.[email�protected][email�protected]t]an old RX-7 with vertical wing[/URL]
Ron
[URL=http:[email�protected]/vwp?.dir=/Equipe+Rapide+SCC/ER062302&.src=ph&.dnm=PIC046.jpg&.view=t&.[email�protected][email�protected]t]an old RX-7 with vertical wing[/URL]
Ron
| GarySheehan | 03-02-2003 03:26 PM |
Blackrain,
Any normal type of wing on an autocross car will not help with downforce to any significant amount. The wing would need to really be standing up to reduce lift or generate downforce. Not knowing the particulars about the autocross and company you described, I would assume the company was trying to sell more wings.
Your comments about FWD cars with wings are incorrect as well. Most of the FWD cars you see on the street have little or no need for a wing, which is true of almost ALL cars on the street. However, wings are a carryover from racing, for RWD, AWD and yes, FWD cars. A wing is a very effective balancing tool for FWD cars. With high rear spring rates, you can get a FWD to rotate nicely in low and medium speed corners, eliminating understeer. But having an oversteering car in high speed corners isn't very safe or fast, so a rear wing on a FWD car will help increase rear traction only in the faster corners, giving the car more rear-end stability and allowing the driver to get through the corner faster. It has a HUGE effect.
Please don't take offense, but you are speaking like an expert when you really don't have any practical experience regarding this stuff. Beginning your sentences with "I always thought that..." or, "It's my opinion that..." will get you pleasant responses that will steer you in the right direction when you are incorrect. Coming in here behaving like an expert without really having a solid understanding of the facts will get you an unpopular reputation.
Almost no one in this forum gets smacked down for asking honests questions when they are trying to learn. Coming up with bad answers because of ignorance will almost guarantee it. If you go into learn mode instead of preach mode, you will have a lot more success here.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
Any normal type of wing on an autocross car will not help with downforce to any significant amount. The wing would need to really be standing up to reduce lift or generate downforce. Not knowing the particulars about the autocross and company you described, I would assume the company was trying to sell more wings.
Your comments about FWD cars with wings are incorrect as well. Most of the FWD cars you see on the street have little or no need for a wing, which is true of almost ALL cars on the street. However, wings are a carryover from racing, for RWD, AWD and yes, FWD cars. A wing is a very effective balancing tool for FWD cars. With high rear spring rates, you can get a FWD to rotate nicely in low and medium speed corners, eliminating understeer. But having an oversteering car in high speed corners isn't very safe or fast, so a rear wing on a FWD car will help increase rear traction only in the faster corners, giving the car more rear-end stability and allowing the driver to get through the corner faster. It has a HUGE effect.
Please don't take offense, but you are speaking like an expert when you really don't have any practical experience regarding this stuff. Beginning your sentences with "I always thought that..." or, "It's my opinion that..." will get you pleasant responses that will steer you in the right direction when you are incorrect. Coming in here behaving like an expert without really having a solid understanding of the facts will get you an unpopular reputation.
Almost no one in this forum gets smacked down for asking honests questions when they are trying to learn. Coming up with bad answers because of ignorance will almost guarantee it. If you go into learn mode instead of preach mode, you will have a lot more success here.
Gary
Sheehan Motor Racing
[url]www.teamSMR.com[/url]
| Handsdown | 03-02-2003 03:54 PM |
Q RS... you said you have a 2002 RS-T... is it a GDA? i've been thinking about the long term possibility of turbocharging a new age 2.5rs and any info on how yours went would be great to hear... i'll send a PM
| Brady | 03-02-2003 04:35 PM |
blackrain,
again, not to bash, but you went horribly awry as soon as you started listening to those goons on Speed. they don't know what they're talking about unless it's NASCAR. just look to HiRev Tuners for an example.
also, it almost sounds as though you weren't watching an autocross if they were going fast, not to mention that I've never seen an autocross covered on Speed - well, actually I've never seen an autocross covered on ANY TV.
again, not to bash, but you went horribly awry as soon as you started listening to those goons on Speed. they don't know what they're talking about unless it's NASCAR. just look to HiRev Tuners for an example.
also, it almost sounds as though you weren't watching an autocross if they were going fast, not to mention that I've never seen an autocross covered on Speed - well, actually I've never seen an autocross covered on ANY TV.
| rohde88 | 03-03-2003 12:29 AM |
what about my pic?? Gary, doesn't that support your statements?
Ron
Ron
| DGoReck | 03-03-2003 12:57 AM |
I look at it this way.... Yeah wings are meant to work at higher speeds(80mph+), but they still will work at lower speeds, especially on our cars.
I would think Prodrive/STI has windtunnel tested the wings. They do work. I keep using this article as a reference. [url]http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=1055&P=1[/url] To me it makes perfect sense, seeing how airflow doesn't reattach on the lid of the car, and higher wing does help reattach airflow to the car. The article says 70kmh, which is what 50mph max? Now I can see what the wing will do upwards of highway speeds of 65mph, it would defiantely have an effect...
Look at the WRC cars, now they are driving upwards of 140kmh...about 87mph.... now would it really be necessary to have a wing like the wrc cars do, if it didn't do anything? And why would the STI(new one we are getting too) have the wing standard and not a deletable option(this still true?)
Dan
I would think Prodrive/STI has windtunnel tested the wings. They do work. I keep using this article as a reference. [url]http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=1055&P=1[/url] To me it makes perfect sense, seeing how airflow doesn't reattach on the lid of the car, and higher wing does help reattach airflow to the car. The article says 70kmh, which is what 50mph max? Now I can see what the wing will do upwards of highway speeds of 65mph, it would defiantely have an effect...
Look at the WRC cars, now they are driving upwards of 140kmh...about 87mph.... now would it really be necessary to have a wing like the wrc cars do, if it didn't do anything? And why would the STI(new one we are getting too) have the wing standard and not a deletable option(this still true?)
Dan
| tdxflex | 03-03-2003 02:13 AM |
dont' know if this grand turismo comparison really applies the way i'm thinking of it, but if you have a big wing in the rear for more downforce, you're helping keep the rear end of the car stick to the ground, so there will be more traction in the rear. but giving more traction in the rear is also changing the balance of the front and rear, so the rear will have more traction than the front and will increase understeer.
the front lip would seem like a better aerodynamic part for our cars because most of the subarus understeer, so putting more downforce on the front of the car should even everything out a bit better.
prodrive did a wind tunnel test with their front lip and wing, forgot the exact results but they recommended either both or not at all.
the front lip would seem like a better aerodynamic part for our cars because most of the subarus understeer, so putting more downforce on the front of the car should even everything out a bit better.
prodrive did a wind tunnel test with their front lip and wing, forgot the exact results but they recommended either both or not at all.
| Snow Rally | 03-03-2003 02:34 AM |
It seems that suspension+ more tire would have significantly more effect than a lip, in controlling understeer.
I actually somewhat like lifting to get the rear around, and appreciate that this car is much less likely (than my old mustang) to come around unexpectedly, should I let a girlfriend drive it.
I actually somewhat like lifting to get the rear around, and appreciate that this car is much less likely (than my old mustang) to come around unexpectedly, should I let a girlfriend drive it.
| peepers | 03-05-2003 04:33 PM |
so... its very likely that a lip in the front and a wing in the rear will make the car more stable and they are not just for looks. thats seems to be what i am getting out of this.
| mikkyo | 03-05-2003 06:26 PM |
I say most wings are put on by folks for dress up and that alone.
I also say that any wing is going to have some effect, be it drag, lift, downforce, or stability, on your car at highway speeds and up.
I have the OEM Wing.
It provides a noticable downforce on the rear and lift on the front at high speeds (80+mph).
I am thinking of adding a front lip/spoiler to combat the front lift. Probably the STi v2 cause I like the looks, and it might help.
I have driven both a stock car without a wing and with, and there is a noticable difference once your speed gets up there.
Please keep in mind if it is windy out, say 20mph and up, you need not reach high speeds to feel areodynamic effects.
I believe the big wings that have rectangular boxy designs are designed as both vertical and horizontal spoilers. These are probably handy for rallying and probably why previous posts have stated that it helped in turns.
If you care about handling, tires, suspension, and alignment should be tried before worrying about a wing.
So why do people spend lots of money on them?
Looks and misguided info are probably the main reasons. If you arent driving above 100mph, racing, or rallying, you really don't need that wing. I think most folks fall into this category.
I bought the OEM wing because I think the sedan looks too plain without it, for me it has a negative effect on handling, but Im sure it is correctable.
I also say that any wing is going to have some effect, be it drag, lift, downforce, or stability, on your car at highway speeds and up.
I have the OEM Wing.
It provides a noticable downforce on the rear and lift on the front at high speeds (80+mph).
I am thinking of adding a front lip/spoiler to combat the front lift. Probably the STi v2 cause I like the looks, and it might help.
I have driven both a stock car without a wing and with, and there is a noticable difference once your speed gets up there.
Please keep in mind if it is windy out, say 20mph and up, you need not reach high speeds to feel areodynamic effects.
I believe the big wings that have rectangular boxy designs are designed as both vertical and horizontal spoilers. These are probably handy for rallying and probably why previous posts have stated that it helped in turns.
If you care about handling, tires, suspension, and alignment should be tried before worrying about a wing.
So why do people spend lots of money on them?
Looks and misguided info are probably the main reasons. If you arent driving above 100mph, racing, or rallying, you really don't need that wing. I think most folks fall into this category.
I bought the OEM wing because I think the sedan looks too plain without it, for me it has a negative effect on handling, but Im sure it is correctable.
| tdxflex | 03-05-2003 06:36 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by peepers [/i]
[B]so... its very likely that a lip in the front and a wing in the rear will make the car more stable and they are not just for looks. thats seems to be what i am getting out of this. [/B][/QUOTE]
some were probably designed for looks but do have functionality. prodrive is the onyl one that i've heard did a wind tunnel test to verify
[B]so... its very likely that a lip in the front and a wing in the rear will make the car more stable and they are not just for looks. thats seems to be what i am getting out of this. [/B][/QUOTE]
some were probably designed for looks but do have functionality. prodrive is the onyl one that i've heard did a wind tunnel test to verify
| Silver Mojo | 03-05-2003 10:31 PM |
why is it everyother day someone new post the same question over and over gain.
sorry, i just had to point this out.
:disco:
sorry, i just had to point this out.
:disco:
| asusimpreza | 03-06-2003 01:33 AM |
Because everyday is a new day? lol
| wReXeRw | 03-06-2003 01:58 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Silver Mojo [/i]
[B]why is it everyother day someone new post the same question over and over gain.
sorry, i just had to point this out.
:disco: [/B][/QUOTE]
they might have searched but couldnt come up with what they were exactly looking for... people come on forums mostly for information... i mean, help them out, you and I were once a n00b too you know:) ...
[B]why is it everyother day someone new post the same question over and over gain.
sorry, i just had to point this out.
:disco: [/B][/QUOTE]
they might have searched but couldnt come up with what they were exactly looking for... people come on forums mostly for information... i mean, help them out, you and I were once a n00b too you know:) ...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét